Plant tolerance to low water, low nitrogen and cold

ABSTRACT

Polynucleotides incorporated into nucleic acid constructs have been introduced into plants and were ectopically expressed. The encoded polypeptides of the invention have been shown to confer at least one regulatory activity and confer earlier flowering, longer floral organ retention, increased cold tolerance, greater tolerance to water deprivation, altered carbon-nitrogen balance sensing, increased low nitrogen tolerance, and/or increased tolerance to hyperosmotic stress as compared to a control plant.

RELATIONSHIP TO COPENDING APPLICATIONS

This application (the “present application”) claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/961,403, filed 20 Jul. 2007; and, the present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 11/479,226, filed 30 Jun. 2006 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,858,848, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/713,994, filed 16 Nov. 2000 (abandoned), which claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/227,439, filed 22 Aug. 2000; and the present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 11/728,567, filed 26 Mar. 2007 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,635,800, which is a division of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/225,066, filed 9 Aug. 2002 (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,238,860), which is a continuation-in-part of both U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/837,944, filed 18 Apr. 2001 (abandoned) and Ser. No. 10/171,468, filed 14 Jun. 2002 (abandoned), and U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/225,066 also claims the benefit of each of U.S. provisional applications 60/310,847, filed 9 Aug. 2001, 60/336,049, filed 19 Nov. 2001, and 60/338,692, filed 11 Dec. 2001; and the present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/412,699, filed 10 Apr. 2003 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,345,217, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/295,403, filed 15 Nov. 2002 (abandoned), which is a division of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/394,519, filed 13 Sep. 1999 (abandoned), which claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/101,349, filed 22 Sep. 1998, and, U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/412,699 is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/713,994, filed 16 Nov. 2000, which claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/227,439, filed 22 Aug. 2000, and, U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/412,699 is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/819,142, filed 27 Mar. 2001 (abandoned), and, U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/412,699 is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/934,455, filed 22 Aug. 2001 (abandoned), which is a continuation-in-part of both U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/713,994, filed 16 Nov. 2000 (abandoned), and U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/837,944, filed 18 Apr. 2001 (abandoned), and U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/934,455 claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/227,439, filed 22 Aug. 2000, and U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/412,699 is also a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/225,066, filed 9 Aug. 2002 (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,238,860), which is a continuation-in-part of both U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 09/837,944, filed 18 Apr. 2001 (abandoned) and 10/171,468, filed 14 Jun. 2002 (abandoned), and U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/225,066 claims the benefit of each of U.S. provisional applications 60/310,847, filed 9 Aug. 2001, 60/336,049, filed 19 Nov. 2001, and 60/338,692, filed 11 Dec. 2001; and, the present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 11/642,814, filed 20 Dec. 2006 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,825,296, which is a division of U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 10/666,642, filed 18 Sep. 2003 (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,196,245), which claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/465,809, filed 24 Apr. 2003. The entire contents of each of these applications are hereby incorporated by reference.

JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT

The claimed invention, in the field of functional genomics and the characterization of plant genes for the improvement of plants, was made by or on behalf of Mendel Biotechnology, Inc. and Monsanto Company as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement in effect on or before the date the claimed invention was made.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to plant genomics and plant improvement, increasing a plant's water use efficiency and abiotic stress tolerance, and the yield that may be obtained from a plant.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The Effects of Various Factors on Plant Yield.

Yield of commercially valuable species in the natural environment may be suboptimal as plants often grow under unfavorable conditions, such as at an inappropriate temperature or with a limited supply of soil nutrients, light, or water availability. Various factors that may affect yield, crop quality, appearance, or overall plant health include:

Nutrient Limitation

Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) are critical limiting nutrients for plants. Phosphorus is second only to nitrogen in its importance as a macronutrient for plant growth and to its impact on crop yield.

Nitrogen and carbon metabolism are tightly linked in almost every biochemical pathway in the plant. Carbon metabolites regulate genes involved in nitrogen acquisition and metabolism, and are known to affect germination and the expression of photosynthetic genes (Coruzzi et al., 2001) and hence growth. Gene regulation by C/N (carbon-nitrogen balance) status has been demonstrated for a number of nitrogen-metabolic genes (Stitt, 1999); Coruzzi et al., 2001). A plant with altered C/N sensing may exhibit improved germination and/or growth under nitrogen-limiting conditions.

Increased tolerance to abiotic stresses, such as water deprivation, salt, freezing and other hyperosmotic stresses, and cold, and heat, may improve germination, early establishment of developing seedlings, and plant development.

In water-limited environments, crop yield is a function of water use, water use efficiency (WUE; defined as aerial biomass yield/water use) and the harvest index (HI; the ratio of yield biomass to the total cumulative biomass at harvest). WUE is a complex trait that involves water and CO₂ uptake, transport and exchange at the leaf surface (transpiration). Improved WUE has been proposed as a criterion for yield improvement under drought. Water deficit can also have adverse effects in the form of increased susceptibility to disease and pests, reduced plant growth and reproductive failure. Genes that improve WUE and tolerance to water deficit thus promote plant growth, fertility, and disease resistance. Enhanced tolerance to these stresses would lead to yield increases in conventional varieties and reduce yield variation in hybrid varieties. Altering the timing of flowering can also enhance the ability to a plant to maintain yield under water limited conditions. For example, acceleration of flowering and maturation may allow a plant to set seed earlier in the growing season and thereby avoid severe water limitation which occurs late in the season.

Plant pathogen injury may affect any part of a plant, and include defoliation, chlorosis, stunting, lesions, loss of photosynthesis, distortions, necrosis, and death. All of these symptoms ultimately result in yield loss in commercially valuable species.

Fortunately, a plant's traits, including its biochemical, developmental, or phenotypic characteristics that enhance yield or tolerance to various abiotic or biotic stresses, may be controlled through a number of cellular processes. One important way to manipulate that control is through transcription factors—proteins that influence the expression of a particular gene or sets of genes. Transformed and transgenic plants that comprise cells having altered levels of at least one selected transcription factor, for example, possess advantageous or desirable traits. Strategies for manipulating traits by altering a plant cell's transcription factor content can therefore result in plants and crops with commercially valuable properties. We have identified polynucleotides encoding transcription factors, including G1760 and closely-related sequences, developed numerous transformed or transgenic plant lines using these polynucleotides, and analyzed the plants for improved traits, such as altered C/N sensing, water or nutrient use efficiency, tolerance to abiotic stresses, such as water deprivation, cold, heat, low nitrogen conditions, and/or resistance to disease. In so doing, we have identified important polynucleotide and polypeptide sequences for producing commercially valuable plants and crops as well as the methods for making them and using them. Other aspects and embodiments of the invention are described below and can be derived from the teachings of this disclosure as a whole.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The invention is directed to transformed seed produced by any of the transformed or transgenic plants of the invention, wherein the transformed seed comprises a transcription factor sequence of the invention. The presently disclosed subject matter also provides methods for producing a transformed plant seed. In some embodiments, the method comprises (a) transforming a plant cell with a nucleic acid construct (for example, an expression vector, an expression cassette, or a DNA preparation) comprising a polynucleotide sequence encoding or targeting a transcription factor polypeptide of the invention, or a fragment or derivative thereof; (b) regenerating a plant from the transformed plant cell; and (c) isolating a transformed seed from the regenerated plant. In some embodiments, the seed may be grown into a plant that has greater tolerance to cold, water deficit, hyperosmotic stress, or low nitrogen conditions than a control plant, for example, a non-transformed plant of the same species, or a non-transformed parental line, or a wild-type plant of the same species. The transformed plant may be a eudicot or dicot plant. The polynucleotide sequence may be derived from a eudicot or dicot plant, such as, for example, soy, rice, maize, Antirrhinum, or Arabidopsis.

The invention also pertains to an expression vector that comprises a recombinant nucleic acid sequence of the invention, such as any of SEQ ID NO: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 or 31, or a sequence that is homologous to any of these sequences, or a sequence that hybridizes to any of these sequences under stringent conditions. The recombinant nucleic acid sequence encodes a polypeptide. The polypeptide shares an amino acid identity with any of SEQ ID NO: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, or 48, wherein the percent amino acid identity is selected from the group consisting of at least about 55%. The recombinant nucleic acid sequence may specifically hybridize to the complement of the sequence set forth in SEQ ID NO: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, or 31 under stringent conditions comprising two wash steps at least as stringent as 6×SSC at 65° C. of 10-30 minutes for each wash step (greater stringency may be achieved by, for example, two wash steps of 0.5×SSC, 0.1% SDS at 65° C., or 0.2×SSC, 0.1% SDS at 65° C.). When the polypeptide is overexpressed in a plant, the polypeptide regulates transcription and confers at least one regulatory activity resulting in an altered trait in the plant as compared to a control plant. The altered trait may be, for example, increased tolerance to low nitrogen conditions, altered carbon-nitrogen balance sensing, increased tolerance to cold, increased tolerance to water deficit conditions, increased tolerance to sucrose, or increased tolerance to hyperosmotic stress.

The invention also pertains to a transgenic plant, or a transformed seed produced from said transgenic plant, where the transgenic plant (or a plant grown from the transformed seed) comprises the aforementioned and above-described nucleic acid construct, and the transgenic plant has earlier flowering, longer floral organ retention (that is, delayed floral organ abscission), greater tolerance to low nitrogen conditions, altered carbon-nitrogen balance sensing, greater tolerance to cold, greater tolerance to water deficit conditions, greater tolerance to sucrose, or greater tolerance to hyperosmotic stress, as compared to a control plant.

The invention also encompasses a method for increasing the tolerance of a plant to low nitrogen conditions, hyperosmotic stress or cold as compared to a control plant, the method comprising:

(a) providing a nucleic acid construct comprising a recombinant nucleic acid sequence encoding a polypeptide sharing an amino acid identity with any of SEQ ID NO: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, or 48, wherein

when the polypeptide is overexpressed in a plant, the polypeptide regulates transcription and confers at least one regulatory activity resulting in an altered trait in the plant as compared to a control plant;

wherein the percent amino acid identity is selected from the group consisting of at least about 55%; and

the altered trait is selected from the group consisting of: increased tolerance to low nitrogen conditions, altered carbon-nitrogen balance sensing, increased tolerance to cold, increased tolerance to water deficit conditions, increased tolerance to sucrose, and increased tolerance to hyperosmotic stress; and

(b) transforming a target plant with the nucleic acid construct to produce a transformed plant;

wherein the transformed plant has greater tolerance to low nitrogen conditions, hyperosmotic stress or cold than the control plant.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEQUENCE LISTING AND DRAWINGS

The Sequence Listing provides exemplary polynucleotide and polypeptide sequences of the invention. The traits associated with the use of the sequences are included in the Examples.

The Sequence Listing in ASCII text format is named “MBI0090CIP substitute2 ST25.txt”, the electronic file of the Sequence Listing was created on 28 Oct. 2009, and is 112,640 bytes in size. The Sequence Listing is hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.

FIG. 1 shows a conservative estimate of phylogenetic relationships among the orders of flowering plants (modified from Soltis et al., 1997). Those plants with a single cotyledon (monocots) are a monophyletic clade nested within at least two major lineages of dicots; the eudicots are further divided into rosids and asterids. Arabidopsis is a rosid eudicot classified within the order Brassicales; rice is a member of the monocot order Poales. FIG. 1 was adapted from Daly et al., 2001.

FIG. 2 shows a phylogenic dendogram depicting phylogenetic relationships of higher plant taxa, including clades containing tomato and Arabidopsis; adapted from Ku et al., 2000; and Chase et al., 1993.

FIG. 3 shows a phylogenetic tree of G 1760 and closely-related related full length proteins that was constructed using MEGA3 (www.megasoftware.net) software. ClustalW multiple alignment parameters were as follows:

-   -   Gap Opening Penalty: 10.00     -   Gap Extension Penalty: 0.20     -   Protein weight matrix: Gonnet series     -   Residue-specific Penalties: ON     -   Hydrophobic Penalties: ON     -   Gap Separation Distance: 4     -   End Gap Separation: OFF     -   Use negative matrix: OFF

The phylogenetic tree was generated in MEGA3 using the neighbor joining algorithm and a p-distance model. Alignment gaps were handled using a pairwise deletion algorithm. A test of phylogeny was done via bootstrap with 1000 replications and Random Seed set to default. Cut off values of the bootstrap tree were set to 50%.

FIG. 4 is an alignment of the G1760 Arabidopsis clade member sequences and soy clade member G3980. Structural domains (adapted from Immink 2002, Davies 1996, and Huang 1996) are indicated by bars above alignment (MADS DNA binding domain, I nuclear localization domain, K protein interaction domain, and C-terminal activation domain). SEQ ID NOs are found in parentheses.

FIGS. 5A-5F are a multiple sequence alignment of full length G1760 and closely-related proteins prepared using ClustalX software and the full-length protein sequences. These polypeptides were identified by BLAST and phylogenetic analysis. The conserved MADS domain is found within the box in FIG. 5A. Asterisks generated by Clustal indicate complete identity, colons represent highly similar residues, and dots represent similar residues throughout the alignment. SEQ ID NOs: are found in the parentheses.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present invention relates to polynucleotides and polypeptides for modifying phenotypes of plants, particularly those associated with increased abiotic stress tolerance and increased yield with respect to a control plant (for example, a wild-type plant or a plant transformed with an “empty” expression vector lacking a DNA sequence of the invention). Throughout this disclosure, various information sources are referred to and/or are specifically incorporated. The information sources include scientific journal articles, patent documents, textbooks, and World Wide Web browser-inactive page addresses. While the reference to these information sources clearly indicates that they can be used by one of skill in the art, each and every one of the information sources cited herein are specifically incorporated in their entirety, whether or not a specific mention of “incorporation by reference” is noted. The contents and teachings of each and every one of the information sources can be relied on and used to make and use embodiments of the invention.

As used herein and in the appended claims, the singular forms “a”, “an”, and “the” include the plural reference unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Thus, for example, a reference to “a host cell” includes a plurality of such host cells, and a reference to “a stress” is a reference to one or more stresses and equivalents thereof known to those skilled in the art, and so forth.

Definitions

“Polynucleotide” is a nucleic acid molecule comprising a plurality of polymerized nucleotides, e.g., at least about 15 consecutive polymerized nucleotides. A polynucleotide may be a nucleic acid, oligonucleotide, nucleotide, or any fragment thereof. In many instances, a polynucleotide comprises a nucleotide sequence encoding a polypeptide (or protein) or a domain or fragment thereof. Additionally, the polynucleotide may comprise a promoter, an intron, an enhancer region, a polyadenylation site, a translation initiation site, 5′ or 3′ untranslated regions, a reporter gene, a selectable marker, or the like. The polynucleotide can be single-stranded or double-stranded DNA or RNA. The polynucleotide optionally comprises modified bases or a modified backbone. The polynucleotide can be, e.g., genomic DNA or RNA, a transcript (such as an mRNA), a cDNA, a PCR product, a cloned DNA, a synthetic DNA or RNA, or the like. The polynucleotide can be combined with carbohydrate, lipids, protein, or other materials to perform a particular activity such as transformation or form a useful composition such as a peptide nucleic acid (PNA). The polynucleotide can comprise a sequence in either sense or antisense orientations. “Oligonucleotide” is substantially equivalent to the terms amplimer, primer, oligomer, element, target, and probe and is preferably single-stranded.

A “recombinant polynucleotide” is a polynucleotide that is not in its native state, e.g., the polynucleotide comprises a nucleotide sequence not found in nature, or the polynucleotide is in a context other than that in which it is naturally found, e.g., separated from nucleotide sequences with which it typically is in proximity in nature, or adjacent (or contiguous with) nucleotide sequences with which it typically is not in proximity. For example, the sequence at issue can be cloned into a nucleic acid construct such as an expression vector or cassette, or otherwise recombined with one or more additional nucleic acids.

An “isolated polynucleotide” is a polynucleotide, whether naturally occurring or recombinant, that is present outside the cell in which it is typically found in nature, whether purified or not. Optionally, an isolated polynucleotide is subject to one or more enrichment or purification procedures, e.g., cell lysis, extraction, centrifugation, precipitation, or the like.

“Gene” or “gene sequence” refers to the partial or complete coding sequence of a gene, its complement, and its 5′ or 3′ untranslated regions. A gene is also a functional unit of inheritance, and in physical terms is a particular segment or sequence of nucleotides along a molecule of DNA (or RNA, in the case of RNA viruses) involved in producing a polypeptide chain. The latter may be subjected to subsequent processing such as chemical modification or folding to obtain a functional protein or polypeptide. A gene may be isolated, partially isolated, or found with an organism's genome. By way of example, a transcription factor gene encodes a transcription factor polypeptide, which may be functional or require processing to function as an initiator of transcription.

Operationally, genes may be defined by the cis-trans test, a genetic test that determines whether two mutations occur in the same gene and that may be used to determine the limits of the genetically active unit (Rieger et al., 1976). A gene generally includes regions preceding (“leaders”; upstream) and following (“trailers”; downstream) the coding region. A gene may also include intervening, non-coding sequences, referred to as “introns”, located between individual coding segments, referred to as “exons”. Most genes have an associated promoter region, a regulatory sequence 5′ of the transcription initiation codon (there are some genes that do not have an identifiable promoter). The function of a gene may also be regulated by enhancers, operators, and other regulatory elements.

A “polypeptide” is an amino acid sequence comprising a plurality of consecutive polymerized amino acid residues e.g., at least about 15 consecutive polymerized amino acid residues. In many instances, a polypeptide comprises a polymerized amino acid residue sequence that is a transcription factor or a domain or portion or fragment thereof. Additionally, the polypeptide may comprise: (i) a localization domain; (ii) an activation domain; (iii) a repression domain; (iv) an oligomerization domain; (v) a protein-protein interaction domain; (vi) a DNA-binding domain; or the like. The polypeptide optionally comprises modified amino acid residues, naturally occurring amino acid residues not encoded by a codon, non-naturally occurring amino acid residues.

“Protein” refers to an amino acid sequence, oligopeptide, peptide, polypeptide or portions thereof whether naturally occurring or synthetic.

“Portion”, as used herein, refers to any part of a protein used for any purpose, but especially for the screening of a library of molecules which specifically bind to that portion or for the production of antibodies.

A “recombinant polypeptide” is a polypeptide produced by translation of a recombinant polynucleotide. A “synthetic polypeptide” is a polypeptide created by consecutive polymerization of isolated amino acid residues using methods well known in the art. An “isolated polypeptide,” whether a naturally occurring or a recombinant polypeptide, is more enriched in (or out of) a cell than the polypeptide in its natural state in a wild-type cell, e.g., more than about 5% enriched, more than about 10% enriched, or more than about 20%, or more than about 50%, or more, enriched, i.e., alternatively denoted: 105%, 110%, 120%, 150% or more, enriched relative to wild type standardized at 100%. Such an enrichment is not the result of a natural response of a wild-type plant. Alternatively, or additionally, the isolated polypeptide is separated from other cellular components with which it is typically associated, e.g., by any of the various protein purification methods herein.

“Homology” refers to sequence similarity between a reference sequence and at least a fragment of a newly sequenced clone insert or its encoded amino acid sequence.

“Identity” or “similarity” refers to sequence similarity between two polynucleotide sequences or between two polypeptide sequences, with identity being a more strict comparison. The phrases “percent identity” and “% identity” refer to the percentage of sequence similarity found in a comparison of two or more polynucleotide sequences or two or more polypeptide sequences. “Sequence similarity” refers to the percent similarity in base pair sequence (as determined by any suitable method) between two or more polynucleotide sequences. Two or more sequences can be anywhere from 0-100% similar, or any integer value therebetween. Identity or similarity can be determined by comparing a position in each sequence that may be aligned for purposes of comparison. When a position in the compared sequence is occupied by the same nucleotide base or amino acid, then the molecules are identical at that position. A degree of similarity or identity between polynucleotide sequences is a function of the number of identical, matching or corresponding nucleotides at positions shared by the polynucleotide sequences. A degree of identity of polypeptide sequences is a function of the number of identical amino acids at corresponding positions shared by the polypeptide sequences. A degree of homology or similarity of polypeptide sequences is a function of the number of amino acids at corresponding positions shared by the polypeptide sequences.

“Alignment” refers to a number of nucleotide bases or amino acid residue sequences aligned by lengthwise comparison so that components in common (i.e., nucleotide bases or amino acid residues at corresponding positions) may be visually and readily identified. The fraction or percentage of components in common is related to the homology or identity between the sequences. Alignments such as those of FIGS. 5A-5F may be used to identify conserved domains and relatedness within these domains. An alignment may suitably be determined by means of computer programs known in the art, such as MACVECTOR software, (1999; Accelrys, Inc., San Diego, Calif.).

A “conserved domain” or “conserved region” as used herein refers to a region in heterologous polynucleotide or polypeptide sequences where there is a relatively high degree of sequence identity between the distinct sequences. With respect to polynucleotides encoding presently disclosed polypeptides, a conserved domain is preferably at least nine base pairs (bp) in length. Transcription factor sequences that possess or encode for conserved domains that have a minimum percentage identity and have comparable biological activity to the present polypeptide sequences, thus being members of the same clade of transcription factor polypeptides, are encompassed by the invention. Overexpression in a transformed plant of a polypeptide that comprises, for example, a conserved domain having DNA-binding, activation or nuclear localization activity results in the transformed plant having similar improved traits as other transformed plants overexpressing other members of the same clade of transcription factor polypeptides.

A fragment or domain can be referred to as outside a conserved domain, outside a consensus sequence, or outside a consensus DNA-binding site that is known to exist or that exists for a particular polypeptide class, family, or sub-family. In this case, the fragment or domain will not include the exact amino acids of a consensus sequence or consensus DNA-binding site of a transcription factor class, family or sub-family, or the exact amino acids of a particular transcription factor consensus sequence or consensus DNA-binding site. Furthermore, a particular fragment, region, or domain of a polypeptide, or a polynucleotide encoding a polypeptide, can be “outside a conserved domain” if all the amino acids of the fragment, region, or domain fall outside of a defined conserved domain(s) for a polypeptide or protein. Sequences having lesser degrees of identity but comparable biological activity are considered to be equivalents.

As one of ordinary skill in the art recognizes, conserved domains may be identified as regions or domains of identity to a specific consensus sequence (see, for example, Riechmann et al., 2000a, 2000b). Thus, by using alignment methods well known in the art, the conserved domains of the plant polypeptides may be determined.

The conserved domains for many of the polypeptide sequences of the invention are listed in Table 1. Also, the polypeptides of Table 1 have conserved domains specifically indicated by amino acid coordinate start and stop sites. A comparison of the regions of these polypeptides allows one of skill in the art (see, for example, Reeves and Nissen, 1995, to identify domains or conserved domains for any of the polypeptides listed or referred to in this disclosure.

“Complementary” refers to the natural hydrogen bonding by base pairing between purines and pyrimidines. For example, the sequence A-C-G-T (5′->3′) forms hydrogen bonds with its complements A-C-G-T (5′->3′) or A-C-G-U (5′->3′). Two single-stranded molecules may be considered partially complementary, if only some of the nucleotides bond, or “completely complementary” if all of the nucleotides bond. The degree of complementarity between nucleic acid strands affects the efficiency and strength of hybridization and amplification reactions. “Fully complementary” refers to the case where bonding occurs between every base pair and its complement in a pair of sequences, and the two sequences have the same number of nucleotides.

The terms “highly stringent” or “highly stringent condition” refer to conditions that permit hybridization of DNA strands whose sequences are highly complementary, wherein these same conditions exclude hybridization of significantly mismatched DNAs. Polynucleotide sequences capable of hybridizing under stringent conditions with the polynucleotides of the present invention may be, for example, variants of the disclosed polynucleotide sequences, including allelic or splice variants, or sequences that encode orthologs or paralogs of presently disclosed polypeptides. Nucleic acid hybridization methods are disclosed in detail by Kashima et al., 1985, Sambrook et al., 1989, and by Haymes et al., 1985, which references are incorporated herein by reference.

In general, stringency is determined by the temperature, ionic strength, and concentration of denaturing agents (e.g., formamide) used in a hybridization and washing procedure (for a more detailed description of establishing and determining stringency, see the section “Identifying Polynucleotides or Nucleic Acids by Hybridization”, below). The degree to which two nucleic acids hybridize under various conditions of stringency is correlated with the extent of their similarity. Thus, similar nucleic acid sequences from a variety of sources, such as within a plant's genome (as in the case of paralogs) or from another plant (as in the case of orthologs) that may perform similar functions can be isolated on the basis of their ability to hybridize with known related polynucleotide sequences. Numerous variations are possible in the conditions and means by which nucleic acid hybridization can be performed to isolate related polynucleotide sequences having similarity to sequences known in the art and are not limited to those explicitly disclosed herein. Such an approach may be used to isolate polynucleotide sequences having various degrees of similarity with disclosed polynucleotide sequences, such as, for example, encoded transcription factors having 55% or greater identity with the conserved domain of disclosed sequences.

The terms “paralog” and “ortholog” are defined below in the section entitled “Orthologs and Paralogs”. In brief, orthologs and paralogs are evolutionarily related genes that have similar sequences and functions. Orthologs are structurally related genes in different species that are derived by a speciation event. Paralogs are structurally related genes within a single species that are derived by a duplication event.

The term “equivalog” describes members of a set of homologous proteins that are conserved with respect to function since their last common ancestor. Related proteins are grouped into equivalog families, and otherwise into protein families with other hierarchically defined homology types. This definition is provided at the Institute for Genomic Research (TIGR) World Wide Web (www) website, “tigr.org” under the heading “Terms associated with TIGRFAMs”.

In general, the term “variant” refers to molecules with some differences, generated synthetically or naturally, in their base or amino acid sequences as compared to a reference (native) polynucleotide or polypeptide, respectively. These differences include substitutions, insertions, deletions or any desired combinations of such changes in a native polynucleotide of amino acid sequence.

With regard to polynucleotide variants, differences between presently disclosed polynucleotides and polynucleotide variants are limited so that the nucleotide sequences of the former and the latter are closely similar overall and, in many regions, identical. Due to the degeneracy of the genetic code, differences between the former and latter nucleotide sequences may be silent (i.e., the amino acids encoded by the polynucleotide are the same, and the variant polynucleotide sequence encodes the same amino acid sequence as the presently disclosed polynucleotide. Variant nucleotide sequences may encode different amino acid sequences, in which case such nucleotide differences will result in amino acid substitutions, additions, deletions, insertions, truncations or fusions with respect to the similar disclosed polynucleotide sequences. These variations may result in polynucleotide variants encoding polypeptides that share at least one functional characteristic. The degeneracy of the genetic code also dictates that many different variant polynucleotides can encode identical and/or substantially similar polypeptides in addition to those sequences illustrated in the Sequence Listing.

Also within the scope of the invention is a variant of a nucleic acid listed in the Sequence Listing, that is, one having a sequence that differs from the one of the polynucleotide sequences in the Sequence Listing, or a complementary sequence, that encodes a functionally equivalent polypeptide (i.e., a polypeptide having some degree of equivalent or similar biological activity) but differs in sequence from the sequence in the Sequence Listing, due to degeneracy in the genetic code. Included within this definition are polymorphisms that may or may not be readily detectable using a particular oligonucleotide probe of the polynucleotide encoding polypeptide, and improper or unexpected hybridization to allelic variants, with a locus other than the normal chromosomal locus for the polynucleotide sequence encoding polypeptide.

“Allelic variant” or “polynucleotide allelic variant” refers to any of two or more alternative forms of a gene occupying the same chromosomal locus. Allelic variation arises naturally through mutation, and may result in phenotypic polymorphism within populations. Gene mutations may be “silent” or may encode polypeptides having altered amino acid sequence. “Allelic variant” and “polypeptide allelic variant” may also be used with respect to polypeptides, and in this case the terms refer to a polypeptide encoded by an allelic variant of a gene.

“Splice variant” or “polynucleotide splice variant” as used herein refers to alternative forms of RNA transcribed from a gene. Splice variation naturally occurs as a result of alternative sites being spliced within a single transcribed RNA molecule or between separately transcribed RNA molecules, and may result in several different forms of mRNA transcribed from the same gene. Thus, splice variants may encode polypeptides having different amino acid sequences, which may or may not have similar functions in the organism. “Splice variant” or “polypeptide splice variant” may also refer to a polypeptide encoded by a splice variant of a transcribed mRNA.

As used herein, “polynucleotide variants” may also refer to polynucleotide sequences that encode paralogs and orthologs of the presently disclosed polypeptide sequences. “Polypeptide variants” may refer to polypeptide sequences that are paralogs and orthologs of the presently disclosed polypeptide sequences.

Differences between presently disclosed polypeptides and polypeptide variants are limited so that the sequences of the former and the latter are closely similar overall and, in many regions, identical. Presently disclosed polypeptide sequences and similar polypeptide variants may differ in amino acid sequence by one or more substitutions, additions, deletions, fusions and truncations, which may be present in any combination. These differences may produce silent changes and result in a functionally equivalent polypeptide. Thus, it will be readily appreciated by those of skill in the art, that any of a variety of polynucleotide sequences is capable of encoding the polypeptides and homolog polypeptides of the invention. A polypeptide sequence variant may have “conservative” changes, wherein a substituted amino acid has similar structural or chemical properties. Deliberate amino acid substitutions may thus be made on the basis of similarity in polarity, charge, solubility, hydrophobicity, hydrophilicity, and/or the amphipathic nature of the residues, as long as a significant amount of the functional or biological activity of the polypeptide is retained. For example, negatively charged amino acids may include aspartic acid and glutamic acid, positively charged amino acids may include lysine and arginine, and amino acids with uncharged polar head groups having similar hydrophilicity values may include leucine, isoleucine, and valine; glycine and alanine; asparagine and glutamine; serine and threonine; and phenylalanine and tyrosine. More rarely, a variant may have “non-conservative” changes, e.g., replacement of a glycine with a tryptophan. Similar minor variations may also include amino acid deletions or insertions, or both. Related polypeptides may comprise, for example, additions and/or deletions of one or more N-linked or O-linked glycosylation sites, or an addition and/or a deletion of one or more cysteine residues. Guidance in determining which and how many amino acid residues may be substituted, inserted or deleted without abolishing functional or biological activity may be found using computer programs well known in the art, for example, DNASTAR software (see U.S. Pat. No. 5,840,544).

“Fragment”, with respect to a polynucleotide, refers to a clone or any part of a polynucleotide molecule that retains a usable, functional characteristic. Useful fragments include oligonucleotides and polynucleotides that may be used in hybridization or amplification technologies or in the regulation of replication, transcription or translation. A “polynucleotide fragment” refers to any subsequence of a polynucleotide, typically, of at least about 9 consecutive nucleotides, preferably at least about 30 nucleotides, more preferably at least about 50 nucleotides, of any of the sequences provided herein. Exemplary polynucleotide fragments are the first sixty consecutive nucleotides of the polynucleotides listed in the Sequence Listing. Exemplary fragments also include fragments that comprise a region that encodes an conserved domain of a polypeptide. Exemplary fragments also include fragments that comprise a conserved domain of a polypeptide.

Fragments may also include subsequences of polypeptides and protein molecules, or a subsequence of the polypeptide. Fragments may have uses in that they may have antigenic potential. In some cases, the fragment or domain is a subsequence of the polypeptide which performs at least one biological function of the intact polypeptide in substantially the same manner, or to a similar extent, as does the intact polypeptide. For example, a polypeptide fragment can comprise a recognizable structural motif or functional domain such as a DNA-binding site or domain that binds to a DNA promoter region, an activation domain, or a domain for protein-protein interactions, and may initiate transcription. Fragments can vary in size from as few as 3 amino acid residues to the full length of the intact polypeptide, but are preferably at least about 30 amino acid residues in length and more preferably at least about 60 amino acid residues in length.

The invention also encompasses production of DNA sequences that encode polypeptides and derivatives, or fragments thereof, entirely by synthetic chemistry. After production, the synthetic sequence may be inserted into any of the many available expression vectors and cell systems using reagents well known in the art. Moreover, synthetic chemistry may be used to introduce mutations into a sequence encoding polypeptides or any fragment thereof.

“Derivative” refers to the chemical modification of a nucleic acid molecule or amino acid sequence. Chemical modifications can include replacement of hydrogen by an alkyl, acyl, or amino group or glycosylation, pegylation, or any similar process that retains or enhances biological activity or lifespan of the molecule or sequence.

The term “plant” includes whole plants, shoot vegetative organs/structures (for example, leaves, stems and tubers), roots, flowers and floral organs/structures (for example, bracts, sepals, petals, stamens, carpels, anthers and ovules), seed (including embryo, endosperm, and seed coat) and fruit (the mature ovary), plant tissue (for example, vascular tissue, ground tissue, and the like) and cells (for example, guard cells, egg cells, and the like), and progeny of same. The class of plants that can be used in the method of the invention is generally as broad as the class of higher and lower plants amenable to transformation techniques, including angiosperms (monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plants), gymnosperms, ferns, horsetails, psilophytes, lycophytes, bryophytes, and multicellular algae (see for example, FIG. 1, adapted from Daly et al., 2001, FIG. 2, adapted from Ku et al., 2000; and see also Tudge, 2000.

A “control plant” as used in the present invention refers to a plant cell, seed, plant component, plant tissue, plant organ or whole plant used to compare against transformed, transgenic or genetically modified plant for the purpose of identifying an enhanced phenotype in the transformed, transgenic or genetically modified plant. A control plant may in some cases be a transformed or transgenic plant line that comprises an empty vector or marker gene, but does not contain the recombinant polynucleotide of the present invention that is expressed in the transformed, transgenic or genetically modified plant being evaluated. In general, a control plant is a plant of the same line or variety as the transformed, transgenic or genetically modified plant being tested. A suitable control plant would include a genetically unaltered or non-transgenic plant of the parental line used to generate a transformed or transgenic plant herein.

“Transformation” refers to the transfer of a foreign polynucleotide sequence into the genome of a host organism such as that of a plant or plant cell. Typically, the foreign genetic material has been introduced into the plant by human manipulation, but any method can be used as one of skill in the art recognizes. Examples of methods of plant transformation include Agrobacterium-mediated transformation (De Blaere et al., 1987) and biolistic methodology (U.S. Pat. No. 4,945,050 to Klein et al., 1987).

A “transformed plant”, which may also be referred to as a “transgenic plant” or “transformant”, generally refers to a plant, a plant cell, plant tissue, seed or calli that has been through, or is derived from a plant that has been through, a transformation process in which a nucleic acid construct such as an expression vector, cassette, plasmid, or nucleic acid preparation that contains at least one foreign polynucleotide sequence is introduced into the plant. The nucleic acid construct contains genetic material that is not found in a wild-type plant of the same species, variety or cultivar. The genetic material may include a regulatory element, a transgene (for example, a foreign transcription factor sequence), an insertional mutagenesis event (such as by transposon or T-DNA insertional mutagenesis), an activation tagging sequence, a mutated sequence, a homologous recombination event, a sequence designed to engineer a change at an endogenous locus through a DNA-repair mechanism, or a sequence modified by chimeraplasty. In some embodiments the regulatory and transcription factor sequence may be derived from the host plant, but by their incorporation into a nucleic acid construct (e.g., an expression vector of cassette), represent an arrangement of the polynucleotide sequences not found a wild-type plant of the same species, variety or cultivar.

An “untransformed plant” is a plant that has not been through the transformation process.

A “stably transformed” plant, plant cell or plant tissue has generally been selected and regenerated on a selection media following transformation.

A nucleic acid construct (i.e., n expression vector or cassette) typically comprises a polypeptide-encoding sequence operably linked (i.e., under regulatory control of) to appropriate inducible or constitutive regulatory sequences that allow for the controlled expression of polypeptide. The construct can be introduced into a plant by transformation or by breeding after transformation of a parent plant. A plant refers to a whole plant as well as to a plant part, such as seed, fruit, leaf, or root, plant tissue, plant cells or any other plant material, e.g., a plant explant, as well as to progeny thereof, and to in vitro systems that mimic biochemical or cellular components or processes in a cell.

“Wild type” or “wild-type”, as used herein, refers to a plant cell, seed, plant component, plant tissue, plant organ or whole plant that has not been genetically modified or treated in an experimental sense. Wild-type cells, seed, components, tissue, organs or whole plants may be used as controls to compare levels of expression and the extent and nature of trait modification with cells, tissue or plants of the same species in which a polypeptide's expression is altered, e.g., in that it has been knocked out, overexpressed, or ectopically expressed.

A “trait” refers to a physiological, morphological, biochemical, or physical characteristic of a plant or particular plant material or cell. In some instances, this characteristic is visible to the human eye, such as seed or plant size, or can be measured by biochemical techniques, such as detecting the protein, starch, or oil content of seed or leaves, or by observation of a metabolic or physiological process, e.g. by measuring tolerance to water deprivation or particular salt or sugar concentrations, or by the observation of the expression level of a gene or genes, e.g., by employing Northern analysis, RT-PCR, microarray gene expression assays, or reporter gene expression systems, or by agricultural observations such as cold tolerance, low nutrient tolerance, hyperosmotic stress tolerance or yield. Any technique can be used to measure the amount of, comparative level of, or difference in any selected chemical compound or macromolecule in the transformed or transgenic plants, however.

“Trait modification” refers to a detectable difference in a characteristic in a plant ectopically expressing, transformed with, or genetically modified using a polynucleotide or polypeptide of the present invention relative to a plant not doing so, such as a wild-type plant. In some cases, the trait modification can be evaluated quantitatively. For example, the trait modification can entail at least about a 2% increase or decrease, or an even greater difference, in an observed trait as compared with a control or wild-type plant. It is known that there can be a natural variation in the modified trait. Therefore, the trait modification observed entails a change of the normal distribution and magnitude of the trait in the plants as compared to control or wild-type plants.

When two or more plants have “similar morphologies”, “substantially similar morphologies”, “a morphology that is substantially similar”, or are “morphologically similar”, the plants have comparable forms or appearances, including analogous features such as overall dimensions, height, width, mass, root mass, shape, glossiness, color, stem diameter, leaf size, leaf dimension, leaf density, internode distance, branching, root branching, number and form of inflorescences, and other macroscopic characteristics, and the individual plants are not readily distinguishable based on morphological characteristics alone.

“Modulates” refers to a change in activity (biological, chemical, or immunological) or lifespan resulting from specific binding between a molecule and either a nucleic acid molecule or a protein.

The term “transcript profile” refers to the expression levels of a set of genes in a cell in a particular state, particularly by comparison with the expression levels of that same set of genes in a cell of the same type in a reference state. For example, the transcript profile of a particular polypeptide in a suspension cell is the expression levels of a set of genes in a cell knocking out or overexpressing that polypeptide compared with the expression levels of that same set of genes in a suspension cell that has normal levels of that polypeptide. The transcript profile can be presented as a list of those genes whose expression level is significantly different between the two treatments, and the difference ratios. Differences and similarities between expression levels may also be evaluated and calculated using statistical and clustering methods.

With regard to gene knockouts as used herein, the term “knockout” refers to a plant or plant cell having a mutation in at least one gene in the plant or cell, where the mutation results in reduced or altered expression or reduced or altered activity of the polypeptide encoded by that gene compared to a control cell. The knockout can be the result of, for example, genomic disruptions, including transposons, tilling, and homologous recombination, antisense constructs, sense constructs, RNA silencing constructs, RNA interference, or targeted engineering of a gene at an endogenous locus by means of a homology dependent DNA repair process. A T-DNA insertion within a gene is an example of a genotypic alteration that may abolish expression of that gene.

“Ectopic expression or altered expression” in reference to a polynucleotide indicates that the pattern of expression in, e.g., a transformed or transgenic plant or plant tissue, is different from the expression pattern in a wild-type plant or a reference plant of the same species. The pattern of expression may also be compared with a reference expression pattern in a wild-type plant of the same species. For example, the polynucleotide or polypeptide is expressed in a cell or tissue type other than a cell or tissue type in which the sequence is expressed in the wild-type plant, or by expression at a time other than at the time the sequence is expressed in the wild-type plant, or by a response to different inducible agents, such as hormones or environmental signals, or at different expression levels (either higher or lower) compared with those found in a wild-type plant. The term also refers to altered expression patterns that are produced by lowering the levels of expression to below the detection level or completely abolishing expression. The resulting expression pattern can be transient or stable, constitutive or inducible. In reference to a polypeptide, the terms “ectopic expression” or “altered expression” further may relate to altered activity levels resulting from the interactions of the polypeptides with exogenous or endogenous modulators or from interactions with factors or as a result of the chemical modification of the polypeptides.

The term “overexpression” as used herein refers to a greater expression level of a gene in a plant, plant cell or plant tissue, compared to expression in a wild-type plant, cell or tissue, at any developmental or temporal stage for the gene. Overexpression can occur when, for example, the genes encoding one or more polypeptides are under the control of a strong promoter (e.g., the cauliflower mosaic virus 35S transcription initiation region). Overexpression may also under the control of an inducible or tissue specific promoter. Thus, overexpression may occur throughout a plant, in specific tissues or cells of the plant, or in the presence or absence of particular environmental signals, depending on the promoter used.

Overexpression may take place in plant cells normally lacking expression of polypeptides functionally equivalent or identical to the present polypeptides. Overexpression may also occur in plant cells where endogenous expression of the present polypeptides or functionally equivalent molecules normally occurs, but such normal expression is at a lower level. Overexpression thus results in a greater than normal production, or “overproduction” of the polypeptide in the plant, cell or tissue.

The term “transcription regulating region” refers to a DNA regulatory sequence that regulates expression of one or more genes in a plant when a transcription factor having one or more specific binding domains binds to the DNA regulatory sequence. Transcription factors typically possess a conserved DNA binding domain. The transcription factors also typically comprise an amino acid subsequence that forms a transcriptional activation or repression domain that regulates expression of one or more abiotic stress tolerance genes in a plant when the transcription factor binds to the regulating region.

“Yield” or “plant yield” refers to increased plant growth, increased crop growth, increased biomass, and/or increased plant product production, and is dependent to some extent on temperature, plant size, organ size, planting density, light, water and nutrient availability, and how the plant copes with various stresses, such as through temperature acclimation and water or nutrient use efficiency.

“Planting density” refers to the number of plants that can be grown per acre. For crop species, planting or population density varies from a crop to a crop, from one growing region to another, and from year to year. Using corn as an example, the average prevailing density in 2000 was in the range of 20,000-25,000 plants per acre in Missouri, USA. A desirable higher population density (a measure of yield) would be at least 22,000 plants per acre, and a more desirable higher population density would be at least 28,000 plants per acre, more preferably at least 34,000 plants per acre, and most preferably at least 40,000 plants per acre. The average prevailing densities per acre of a few other examples of crop plants in the USA in the year 2000 were: wheat 1,000,000-1,500,000; rice 650,000-900,000; soybean 150,000-200,000, canola 260,000-350,000, sunflower 17,000-23,000 and cotton 28,000-55,000 plants per acre (Cheikh et al., 2003, U.S. Patent Application No. 20030101479). A desirable higher population density for each of these examples, as well as other valuable species of plants, would be at least 10% higher than the average prevailing density or yield.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SPECIFIC EMBODIMENTS

Transcription Factors Modify Expression of Endogenous Genes

A transcription factor may include, but is not limited to, any polypeptide that can activate or repress transcription of a single gene or a number of genes. As one of ordinary skill in the art recognizes, transcription factors can be identified by the presence of a region or domain of structural similarity or identity to a specific consensus sequence or the presence of a specific consensus DNA-binding motif (see, for example, Riechmann et al., 2000a). The plant transcription factors of the present invention are putative transcription factors.

Generally, transcription factors are involved in the control of gene expression which leads to changes in cellular processes including cell differentiation and proliferation and the regulation of growth. Accordingly, one skilled in the art would recognize that by expressing the present sequences in a plant, one may change the expression of autologous genes or induce the expression of introduced genes. By affecting the expression of similar autologous sequences in a plant that have the biological activity of the present sequences, or by introducing the present sequences into a plant, one may alter a plant's phenotype to one with improved traits related to osmotic stresses. The sequences of the invention may also be used to transform a plant and introduce desirable traits not found in the wild-type cultivar or strain. Plants may then be selected for those that produce the most desirable degree of over- or under-expression of target genes of interest and coincident trait improvement.

The sequences of the present invention may be from any species, particularly plant species, in a naturally occurring form or from any source whether natural, synthetic, semi-synthetic or recombinant. The sequences of the invention may also include fragments of the present amino acid sequences. Where “amino acid sequence” is recited to refer to an amino acid sequence of a naturally occurring protein molecule, “amino acid sequence” and like terms are not meant to limit the amino acid sequence to the complete native amino acid sequence associated with the recited protein molecule.

In addition to methods for modifying a plant phenotype by employing one or more polynucleotides and polypeptides of the invention described herein, the polynucleotides and polypeptides of the invention have a variety of additional uses. These uses include their use in the recombinant production (i.e., expression) of proteins; as regulators of plant gene expression, as diagnostic probes for the presence of complementary or partially complementary nucleic acids (including for detection of natural coding nucleic acids); as substrates for further reactions, e.g., mutation reactions, PCR reactions, or the like; as substrates for cloning e.g., including digestion or ligation reactions; and for identifying exogenous or endogenous modulators of the transcription factors. The polynucleotide can be, e.g., genomic DNA or RNA, a transcript (such as an mRNA), a cDNA, a PCR product, a cloned DNA, a synthetic DNA or RNA, or the like. The polynucleotide can comprise a sequence in either sense or antisense orientations.

Expression of genes that encode polypeptides that modify expression of endogenous genes, polynucleotides, and proteins are well known in the art. In addition, transformed or transgenic plants comprising isolated polynucleotides encoding transcription factors may also modify expression of endogenous genes, polynucleotides, and proteins. Examples include Peng et al., 1997, and Peng et al., 1999. In addition, many others have demonstrated that an Arabidopsis transcription factor expressed in an exogenous plant species elicits the same or very similar phenotypic response. See, for example, Fu et al., 2001; Nandi et al., 2000; Coupland, 1995; and Weigel and Nilsson, 1995.

In another example, Mandel et al., 1992b, and Suzuki et al., 2001, teach that a transcription factor expressed in another plant species elicits the same or very similar phenotypic response of the endogenous sequence, as often predicted in earlier studies of Arabidopsis transcription factors in Arabidopsis (see Mandel et al., 1992a; Suzuki et al., 2001). Other examples include Müller et al., 2001; Kim et al., 2001; Kyozuka and Shimamoto, 2002; Boss and Thomas, 2002; He et al., 2000; and Robson et al., 2001.

In yet another example, Gilmour et al., 1998, teach an Arabidopsis AP2 transcription factor, CBFl, which, when overexpressed in transgenic plants, increases plant freezing tolerance. Jaglo et al., 2001, further identified sequences in Brassica napus which encode CBF-like genes and that transcripts for these genes accumulated rapidly in response to low temperature. Transcripts encoding CBF-like proteins were also found to accumulate rapidly in response to low temperature in wheat, as well as in tomato. An alignment of the CBF proteins from Arabidopsis, B. napus, wheat, rye, and tomato revealed the presence of conserved consecutive amino acid residues, PKK/RPAGRxKFxETRHP (SEQ ID NO: 75) and DSAWR, which bracket the AP2/EREBP DNA binding domains of the proteins and distinguish them from other members of the AP2/EREBP protein family. (Jaglo et al., 2001).

Transcription factors mediate cellular responses and control traits through altered expression of genes containing cis-acting nucleotide sequences that are targets of the introduced transcription factor. It is well appreciated in the art that the effect of a transcription factor on cellular responses or a cellular trait is determined by the particular genes whose expression is either directly or indirectly (e.g., by a cascade of transcription factor binding events and transcriptional changes) altered by transcription factor binding. In a global analysis of transcription comparing a standard condition with one in which a transcription factor is overexpressed, the resulting transcript profile associated with transcription factor overexpression is related to the trait or cellular process controlled by that transcription factor. For example, the PAP2 gene and other genes in the MYB family have been shown to control anthocyanin biosynthesis through regulation of the expression of genes known to be involved in the anthocyanin biosynthetic pathway (Bruce et al., 2000; and Borevitz et al., 2000). Further, global transcript profiles have been used successfully as diagnostic tools for specific cellular states (e.g., cancerous vs. non-cancerous; Bhattacharjee et al., 2001; and Xu et al., 2001). Consequently, it is evident to one skilled in the art that similarity of transcript profile upon overexpression of different transcription factors would indicate similarity of transcription factor function.

Polypeptides and Polynucleotides of the Invention

The present invention includes putative transcription factors (TFs), and isolated or recombinant polynucleotides encoding the polypeptides, or novel sequence variant polypeptides or polynucleotides encoding novel variants of polypeptides derived from the specific sequences provided in the Sequence Listing; the recombinant polynucleotides of the invention may be incorporated in nucleic acid constructs for the purpose of producing transformed plants. Also provided are methods for improving the yield that may be obtained from a plant by modifying the mass, size or number of plant organs or seed of a plant by controlling a number of cellular processes, and for increasing a plant's resistance to abiotic stresses. These methods are based on the ability to alter the expression of critical regulatory molecules that may be conserved between diverse plant species. Related conserved regulatory molecules may be originally discovered in a model system such as Arabidopsis and homologous, functional molecules then discovered in other plant species. The latter may then be used to confer increased yield or abiotic stress tolerance in diverse plant species.

Exemplary polynucleotides encoding the polypeptides of the invention were identified in the Arabidopsis thaliana GenBank database using publicly available sequence analysis programs and parameters. Sequences initially identified were then further characterized to identify sequences comprising specified sequence strings corresponding to sequence motifs present in families of known polypeptides. In addition, further exemplary polynucleotides encoding the polypeptides of the invention were identified in the plant GenBank database using publicly available sequence analysis programs and parameters. Sequences initially identified were then further characterized to identify sequences comprising specified sequence strings corresponding to sequence motifs present in families of known polypeptides.

Additional polynucleotides of the invention were identified by screening Arabidopsis thaliana and/or other plant cDNA libraries with probes corresponding to known polypeptides under low stringency hybridization conditions. Additional sequences, including full length coding sequences, were subsequently recovered by the rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) procedure using a commercially available kit according to the manufacturer's instructions. Where necessary, multiple rounds of RACE are performed to isolate 5′ and 3′ ends. The full-length cDNA was then recovered by a routine end-to-end polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using primers specific to the isolated 5′ and 3′ ends. Exemplary sequences are provided in the Sequence Listing.

Many of the sequences in the Sequence Listing, derived from diverse plant species, have been ectopically expressed in overexpressor plants. The changes in the characteristic(s) or trait(s) of the plants were then observed and found to confer abiotic stress tolerance and/or hence will likely increase yield and or crop quality. Therefore, the polynucleotides and polypeptides can be used to improve desirable characteristics of plants.

The polynucleotides of the invention were also ectopically expressed in overexpressor plant cells and the changes in the expression levels of a number of genes, polynucleotides, and/or proteins of the plant cells observed. Therefore, the polynucleotides and polypeptides can be used to change expression levels of genes, polynucleotides, and/or proteins of plants or plant cells.

The data presented herein represent the results obtained in experiments with polynucleotides and polypeptides that may be expressed in plants for the purpose of reducing yield losses that arise from biotic and abiotic stress.

Orthologs and Paralogs

Homologous sequences as described above can comprise orthologous or paralogous sequences. Several different methods are known by those of skill in the art for identifying and defining these functionally homologous sequences. General methods for identifying orthologs and paralogs, including phylogenetic methods, sequence similarity and hybridization methods, are described herein; an ortholog or paralog, including equivalogs, may be identified by one or more of the methods described below.

As described by Eisen, 1998, evolutionary information may be used to predict gene function. It is common for groups of genes that are homologous in sequence to have diverse, although usually related, functions. However, in many cases, the identification of homologs is not sufficient to make specific predictions because not all homologs have the same function. Thus, an initial analysis of functional relatedness based on sequence similarity alone may not provide one with a means to determine where similarity ends and functional relatedness begins. Fortunately, it is well known in the art that protein function can be classified using phylogenetic analysis of gene trees combined with the corresponding species. Functional predictions can be greatly improved by focusing on how the genes became similar in sequence (i.e., by evolutionary processes) rather than on the sequence similarity itself (Eisen, 1998). In fact, many specific examples exist in which gene function has been shown to correlate well with gene phylogeny (Eisen, 1998). Thus, “[t]he first step in making functional predictions is the generation of a phylogenetic tree representing the evolutionary history of the gene of interest and its homologs. Such trees are distinct from clusters and other means of characterizing sequence similarity because they are inferred by techniques that help convert patterns of similarity into evolutionary relationships . . . . After the gene tree is inferred, biologically determined functions of the various homologs are overlaid onto the tree. Finally, the structure of the tree and the relative phylogenetic positions of genes of different functions are used to trace the history of functional changes, which is then used to predict functions of [as yet] uncharacterized genes” (Eisen, 1998).

Within a single plant species, gene duplication may cause two copies of a particular gene, giving rise to two or more genes with similar sequence and often similar function known as paralogs. A paralog is therefore a similar gene formed by duplication within the same species. Paralogs typically cluster together or in the same clade (a group of similar genes) when a gene family phylogeny is analyzed using programs such as CLUSTAL (Thompson et al., 1994; Higgins et al., 1996). Groups of similar genes can also be identified with pair-wise BLAST analysis (Feng and Doolittle, 1987). For example, a clade of very similar MADS domain transcription factors from Arabidopsis all share a common function in flowering time (Ratcliffe et al., 2001), and a group of very similar AP2 domain transcription factors from Arabidopsis are involved in tolerance of plants to freezing (Gilmour et al., 1998). Analysis of groups of similar genes with similar function that fall within one clade can yield sub-sequences that are particular to the clade. These sub-sequences, known as consensus sequences, can not only be used to define the sequences within each clade, but define the functions of these genes; genes within a clade may contain paralogous sequences, or orthologous sequences that share the same function (see also, for example, Mount, 2001).

Transcription factor gene sequences are conserved across diverse eukaryotic species lines (Goodrich et al., 1993; Lin et al., 1991; Sadowski et al., 1988). Plants are no exception to this observation; diverse plant species possess transcription factors that have similar sequences and functions. Speciation, the production of new species from a parental species, gives rise to two or more genes with similar sequence and similar function. These genes, termed orthologs, often have an identical function within their host plants and are often interchangeable between species without losing function. Because plants have common ancestors, many genes in any plant species will have a corresponding orthologous gene in another plant species. Once a phylogenic tree for a gene family of one species has been constructed using a program such as CLUSTAL (Thompson et al., 1994); Higgins et al., 1996) potential orthologous sequences can be placed into the phylogenetic tree and their relationship to genes from the species of interest can be determined. Orthologous sequences can also be identified by a reciprocal BLAST strategy. Once an orthologous sequence has been identified, the function of the ortholog can be deduced from the identified function of the reference sequence.

By using a phylogenetic analysis, one skilled in the art would recognize that the ability to predict similar functions conferred by closely-related polypeptides is predictable. This predictability has been confirmed by our own many studies in which we have found that a wide variety of polypeptides have orthologous or closely-related homologous sequences that function as does the first, closely-related reference sequence. For example, distinct transcription factors, including:

(i) AP2 family Arabidopsis G47 (found in U.S. Pat. No. 7,135,616, issued 14 Nov. 2006), a phylogenetically-related sequence from soybean, and two phylogenetically-related homologs from rice all can confer greater tolerance to drought, hyperosmotic stress, or delayed flowering as compared to control plants;

(ii) CAAT family Arabidopsis G481 (found in PCT patent publication WO2004076638), and numerous phylogenetically-related sequences from dicots and monocots can confer greater tolerance to drought-related stress as compared to control plants;

(iii) Myb-related Arabidopsis G682 (found in U.S. Pat. No. 7,223,904, issued 29 May 2007) and numerous phylogenetically-related sequences from dicots and monocots can confer greater tolerance to heat, drought-related stress, cold, and salt as compared to control plants;

(iv) WRKY family Arabidopsis G1274 (found in U.S. Pat. No. 7,196,245, issued 27 Mar. 2007) and numerous closely-related sequences from dicots and monocots have been shown to confer increased water deprivation tolerance, and

(v) AT-hook family soy sequence G3456 (found in US patent publication 20040128712A1) and numerous phylogenetically-related sequences from dicots and monocots, increased biomass compared to control plants when these sequences are overexpressed in plants.

The polypeptides sequences belong to distinct clades of polypeptides that include members from diverse species. In each case, most or all of the clade member sequences derived from both dicots and monocots have been shown to confer increased tolerance to one or more abiotic stresses when the sequences were overexpressed, and hence will likely increase yield and or crop quality. These studies each demonstrate that evolutionarily conserved genes from diverse species are likely to function similarly (i.e., by regulating similar target sequences and controlling the same traits), and that polynucleotides from one species may be transformed into closely-related or distantly-related plant species to confer or improve traits.

At the nucleotide level, the sequences of the invention will typically share at least about 30% or 40% nucleotide sequence identity, preferably at least about 50%, about 60%, about 70% or about 80% sequence identity, and more preferably about 85%, about 90%, about 95% or about 97% or more sequence identity to one or more of the listed full-length sequences, or to a region of a listed sequence excluding or outside of the region(s) encoding a known consensus sequence or consensus DNA-binding site, or outside of the region(s) encoding one or all conserved domains. The degeneracy of the genetic code enables major variations in the nucleotide sequence of a polynucleotide while maintaining the amino acid sequence of the encoded protein.

At the polypeptide level, the sequences of the invention will typically share at least about 50%, about 60%, about 70% or about 80% sequence identity, and more preferably about 85%, about 90%, about 95% or about 97% or more sequence identity to one or more of the listed full-length sequences, or to a listed sequence but excluding or outside of the known consensus sequence or consensus DNA-binding site.

Percent identity can be determined electronically, e.g., by using the MEGALIGN program (DNASTAR, Inc. Madison, Wis.). The MEGALIGN program can create alignments between two or more sequences according to different methods, for example, the clustal method (see, for example, Higgins and Sharp, 1988). The clustal algorithm groups sequences into clusters by examining the distances between all pairs. The clusters are aligned pairwise and then in groups. Other alignment algorithms or programs may be used, including FASTA, BLAST, or ENTREZ, FASTA and BLAST, and which may be used to calculate percent similarity. These are available as a part of the GCG sequence analysis package (University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.), and can be used with or without default settings. ENTREZ is available through the National Center for Biotechnology Information. In one embodiment, the percent identity of two sequences can be determined by the GCG program with a gap weight of 1, e.g., each amino acid gap is weighted as if it were a single amino acid or nucleotide mismatch between the two sequences (see U.S. Pat. No. 6,262,333).

Software for performing BLAST analyses is publicly available, e.g., through the National Center for Biotechnology Information (see internet website at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). This algorithm involves first identifying high scoring sequence pairs (HSPs) by identifying short words of length W in the query sequence, which either match or satisfy some positive-valued threshold score T when aligned with a word of the same length in a database sequence. T is referred to as the neighborhood word score threshold (Altschul, 1990; Altschul et al., 1993). These initial neighborhood word hits act as seeds for initiating searches to find longer HSPs containing them. The word hits are then extended in both directions along each sequence for as far as the cumulative alignment score can be increased. Cumulative scores are calculated using, for nucleotide sequences, the parameters M (reward score for a pair of matching residues; always>0) and N (penalty score for mismatching residues; always<0). For amino acid sequences, a scoring matrix is used to calculate the cumulative score. Extension of the word hits in each direction are halted when: the cumulative alignment score falls offby the quantity X from its maximum achieved value; the cumulative score goes to zero or below, due to the accumulation of one or more negative-scoring residue alignments; or the end of either sequence is reached. The BLAST algorithm parameters W, T, and X determine the sensitivity and speed of the alignment. The BLASTN program (for nucleotide sequences) uses as defaults a wordlength (W) of 11, an expectation (E) of 10, a cutoff of 100, M=5, n=−4, and a comparison of both strands. For amino acid sequences, the BLASTP program uses as defaults a wordlength (W) of 3, an expectation (E) of 10, and the BLOSUM62 scoring matrix (see Henikoff and Henikoff, 1989). Unless otherwise indicated for comparisons of predicted polynucleotides, “sequence identity” refers to the % sequence identity generated from a tblastx using the NCBI version of the algorithm at the default settings using gapped alignments with the filter “off” (see, for example, internet website at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/).

Other techniques for alignment are described by Doolittle, 1996. Preferably, an alignment program that permits gaps in the sequence is utilized to align the sequences. The Smith-Waterman is one type of algorithm that permits gaps in sequence alignments (see Shpaer, 1997). Also, the GAP program using the Needleman and Wunsch alignment method can be utilized to align sequences. An alternative search strategy uses MPSRCH software, which runs on a MASPAR computer. MPSRCH uses a Smith-Waterman algorithm to score sequences on a massively parallel computer. This approach improves ability to pick up distantly related matches, and is especially tolerant of small gaps and nucleotide sequence errors. Nucleic acid-encoded amino acid sequences can be used to search both protein and DNA databases.

The percentage similarity between two polypeptide sequences, e.g., sequence A and sequence B, is calculated by dividing the length of sequence A, minus the number of gap residues in sequence A, minus the number of gap residues in sequence B, into the sum of the residue matches between sequence A and sequence B, times one hundred. Gaps of low or of no similarity between the two amino acid sequences are not included in determining percentage similarity. Percent identity between polynucleotide sequences can also be counted or calculated by other methods known in the art, e.g., the Jotun Hein method (see, for example, Hein, 1990) Identity between sequences can also be determined by other methods known in the art, e.g., by varying hybridization conditions (see US Patent Application No. 20010010913).

Thus, the invention provides methods for identifying a sequence similar or paralogous or orthologous or homologous to one or more polynucleotides as noted herein, or one or more target polypeptides encoded by the polynucleotides, or otherwise noted herein and may include linking or associating a given plant phenotype or gene function with a sequence. In the methods, a sequence database is provided (locally or across an internet or intranet) and a query is made against the sequence database using the relevant sequences herein and associated plant phenotypes or gene functions.

In addition, one or more polynucleotide sequences or one or more polypeptides encoded by the polynucleotide sequences may be used to search against a BLOCKS (Bairoch et al., 1997), PFAM, and other databases which contain previously identified and annotated motifs, sequences and gene functions. Methods that search for primary sequence patterns with secondary structure gap penalties (Smith et al., 1992) as well as algorithms such as Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST; Altschul, 1990; Altschul et al., 1993), BLOCKS (Henikoff and Henikoff, 1991), Hidden Markov Models (HMM; Eddy, 1996; Sonnhammer et al., 1997), and the like, can be used to manipulate and analyze polynucleotide and polypeptide sequences encoded by polynucleotides. These databases, algorithms and other methods are well known in the art and are described in Ausubel et al., 1997, and in Meyers, 1995.

A further method for identifying or confirming that specific homologous sequences control the same function is by comparison of the transcript profile(s) obtained upon overexpression or knockout of two or more related polypeptides. Since transcript profiles are diagnostic for specific cellular states, one skilled in the art will appreciate that genes that have a highly similar transcript profile (e.g., with greater than 50% regulated transcripts in common, or with greater than 70% regulated transcripts in common, or with greater than 90% regulated transcripts in common) will have highly similar functions. Fowler and Thomashow, 2002, have shown that three paralogous AP2 family genes (CBF1, CBF2 and CBF3) are induced upon cold treatment, and each of which can condition improved freezing tolerance, and all have highly similar transcript profiles. Once a polypeptide has been shown to provide a specific function, its transcript profile becomes a diagnostic tool to determine whether paralogs or orthologs have the same function.

Furthermore, methods using manual alignment of sequences similar or homologous to one or more polynucleotide sequences or one or more polypeptides encoded by the polynucleotide sequences may be used to identify regions of similarity and conserved domains characteristic of a particular transcription factor family. Such manual methods are well-known of those of skill in the art and can include, for example, comparisons of tertiary structure between a polypeptide sequence encoded by a polynucleotide that comprises a known function and a polypeptide sequence encoded by a polynucleotide sequence that has a function not yet determined. Such examples of tertiary structure may comprise predicted alpha helices, beta-sheets, amphipathic helices, leucine zipper motifs, zinc finger motifs, proline-rich regions, cysteine repeat motifs, and the like.

Orthologs and paralogs of presently disclosed polypeptides may be cloned using compositions provided by the present invention according to methods well known in the art. cDNAs can be cloned using mRNA from a plant cell or tissue that expresses one of the present sequences. Appropriate mRNA sources may be identified by interrogating Northern blots with probes designed from the present sequences, after which a library is prepared from the mRNA obtained from a positive cell or tissue. Polypeptide-encoding cDNA is then isolated using, for example, PCR, using primers designed from a presently disclosed gene sequence, or by probing with a partial or complete cDNA or with one or more sets of degenerate probes based on the disclosed sequences. The cDNA library may be used to transform plant cells. Expression of the cDNAs of interest is detected using, for example, microarrays, Northern blots, quantitative PCR, or any other technique for monitoring changes in expression. Genomic clones may be isolated using similar techniques to those.

Examples of orthologs of the Arabidopsis polypeptide sequences and their functionally similar orthologs are listed in Table 1 and the Sequence Listing. In addition to the sequences in Table 1 and the Sequence Listing, the invention encompasses isolated nucleotide sequences that are phylogenetically and structurally similar to sequences listed in the Sequence Listing) and can function in a plant by increasing yield and/or and abiotic stress tolerance when ectopically expressed in a plant.

Since a significant number of these sequences are phylogenetically and sequentially related to each other and have been shown to increase a plant's tolerance to one or more abiotic stresses, one skilled in the art would predict that other similar, phylogenetically related sequences falling within the present clades of polypeptides would also perform similar functions when ectopically expressed.

Identifying Polynucleotides or Nucleic Acids by Hybridization

Polynucleotides homologous to the sequences illustrated in the Sequence Listing and tables can be identified, e.g., by hybridization to each other under stringent or under highly stringent conditions. Single stranded polynucleotides hybridize when they associate based on a variety of well characterized physical-chemical forces, such as hydrogen bonding, solvent exclusion, base stacking and the like. The stringency of a hybridization reflects the degree of sequence identity of the nucleic acids involved, such that the higher the stringency, the more similar are the two polynucleotide strands. Stringency is influenced by a variety of factors, including temperature, salt concentration and composition, organic and non-organic additives, solvents, etc. present in both the hybridization and wash solutions and incubations (and number thereof), as described in more detail in the references cited below (e.g., Sambrook et al., 1989; Berger and Kimmel, 1987; and Anderson and Young, 1985).

Encompassed by the invention are polynucleotide sequences that are capable of hybridizing to the claimed polynucleotide sequences, including any of the polynucleotides within the Sequence Listing, and fragments thereof under various conditions of stringency (see, for example, Wahl and Berger, 1987; and Kimmel, 1987). In addition to the nucleotide sequences listed in the Sequence Listing, full length cDNA, orthologs, and paralogs of the present nucleotide sequences may be identified and isolated using well-known methods. The cDNA libraries, orthologs, and paralogs of the present nucleotide sequences may be screened using hybridization methods to determine their utility as hybridization target or amplification probes.

With regard to hybridization, conditions that are highly stringent, and means for achieving them, are well known in the art. See, for example, Sambrook et al., 1989; Berger and Kimmel, 1987, pages 467-469; and Anderson and Young, 1985.

Stability of DNA duplexes is affected by such factors as base composition, length, and degree of base pair mismatch. Hybridization conditions may be adjusted to allow DNAs of different sequence relatedness to hybridize. The melting temperature (T_(m)) is defined as the temperature when 50% of the duplex molecules have dissociated into their constituent single strands. The melting temperature of a perfectly matched duplex, where the hybridization buffer contains formamide as a denaturing agent, may be estimated by the following equations:

(I) DNA-DNA: T _(m)(° C.)=81.5+16.6(log [Na+])+0.41(% G+C)−0.62(% formamide)−500/L

(II) DNA-RNA: T _(m)(° C.)=79.8+18.5(log [Na+])+0.58(% G+C)+0.12(% G+C)²−0.5(% formamide)−820/L

(III) RNA-RNA: T _(m)(° C.)=79.8+18.5(log [Na+])+0.58(% G+C)+0.12(% G+C)²−0.35(% formamide)−820/L

where L is the length of the duplex formed, [Na+] is the molar concentration of the sodium ion in the hybridization or washing solution, and % G+C is the percentage of (guanine+cytosine) bases in the hybrid. For imperfectly matched hybrids, approximately 1° C. is required to reduce the melting temperature for each 1% mismatch.

Hybridization experiments are generally conducted in a buffer of pH between 6.8 to 7.4, although the rate of hybridization is nearly independent of pH at ionic strengths likely to be used in the hybridization buffer (Anderson and Young, 1985). In addition, one or more of the following may be used to reduce non-specific hybridization: sonicated salmon sperm DNA or another non-complementary DNA, bovine serum albumin, sodium pyrophosphate, sodium dodecylsulfate (SDS), polyvinyl-pyrrolidone, ficoll and Denhardt's solution. Dextran sulfate and polyethylene glycol 6000 act to exclude DNA from solution, thus raising the effective probe DNA concentration and the hybridization signal within a given unit of time. In some instances, conditions of even greater stringency may be desirable or required to reduce non-specific and/or background hybridization. These conditions may be created with the use of higher temperature, lower ionic strength and higher concentration of a denaturing agent such as formamide.

Stringency conditions can be adjusted to screen for moderately similar fragments such as homologous sequences from distantly related organisms, or to highly similar fragments such as genes that duplicate functional enzymes from closely related organisms. The stringency can be adjusted either during the hybridization step or in the post-hybridization washes. Salt concentration, formamide concentration, hybridization temperature and probe lengths are variables that can be used to alter stringency (as described by the formula above). As a general guidelines high stringency is typically performed at T_(m)−5° C. to T_(m)−20° C., moderate stringency at T_(m)−20° C. to T_(m)−35° C. and low stringency at T_(m)−35° C. to T_(m)−50° C. for duplex >150 base pairs. Hybridization may be performed at low to moderate stringency (25-50° C. below T_(m)), followed by post-hybridization washes at increasing stringencies. Maximum rates of hybridization in solution are determined empirically to occur at T_(m)-25° C. for DNA-DNA duplex and T_(m)−15° C. for RNA-DNA duplex. Optionally, the degree of dissociation may be assessed after each wash step to determine the need for subsequent, higher stringency wash steps.

High stringency conditions may be used to select for nucleic acid sequences with high degrees of identity to the disclosed sequences. An example of stringent hybridization conditions obtained in a filter-based method such as a Southern or Northern blot for hybridization of complementary nucleic acids that have more than 100 complementary residues is about 5° C. to 20° C. lower than the thermal melting point (T_(m)) for the specific sequence at a defined ionic strength and pH. Conditions used for hybridization may include about 0.02 M to about 0.15 M sodium chloride, about 0.5% to about 5% casein, about 0.02% SDS or about 0.1% N-laurylsarcosine, about 0.001 M to about 0.03 M sodium citrate, at hybridization temperatures between about 50° C. and about 70° C. More preferably, high stringency conditions are about 0.02 M sodium chloride, about 0.5% casein, about 0.02% SDS, about 0.001 M sodium citrate, at a temperature of about 50° C. Nucleic acid molecules that hybridize under stringent conditions will typically hybridize to a probe based on either the entire DNA molecule or selected portions, e.g., to a unique subsequence, of the DNA.

Stringent salt concentration will ordinarily be less than about 750 mM NaCl and 75 mM trisodium citrate. Increasingly stringent conditions may be obtained with less than about 500 mM NaCl and 50 mM trisodium citrate, to even greater stringency with less than about 250 mM NaCl and 25 mM trisodium citrate. Low stringency hybridization can be obtained in the absence of organic solvent, e.g., formamide, whereas high stringency hybridization may be obtained in the presence of at least about 35% formamide, and more preferably at least about 50% formamide. Stringent temperature conditions will ordinarily include temperatures of at least about 30° C., more preferably of at least about 37° C., and most preferably of at least about 42° C. with formamide present. Varying additional parameters, such as hybridization time, the concentration of detergent, e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and ionic strength, are well known to those skilled in the art. Various levels of stringency are accomplished by combining these various conditions as needed.

The washing steps that follow hybridization may also vary in stringency; the post-hybridization wash steps primarily determine hybridization specificity, with the most critical factors being temperature and the ionic strength of the final wash solution. Wash stringency can be increased by decreasing salt concentration or by increasing temperature. Stringent salt concentration for the wash steps will preferably be less than about 30 mM NaCl and 3 mM trisodium citrate, and most preferably less than about 15 mM NaCl and 1.5 mM trisodium citrate.

Thus, hybridization and wash conditions that may be used to bind and remove polynucleotides with less than the desired homology to the nucleic acid sequences or their complements that encode the present polypeptides include, for example:

0.5×, 1.0×, 1.5×, or 2×SSC, 0.1% SDS at 50°, 55°, 60° or 65° C., or 6×SSC at 65° C.;

50% formamide, 4×SSC at 42° C.; or

0.5×SSC, 0.1% SDS at 65° C.;

with, for example, two wash steps of 10-30 minutes each. Useful variations on these conditions will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art. A formula for “SSC, 20×” may be found, for example, in Ausubel et al., 1997, in Appendix A1.

A person of skill in the art would not expect substantial variation among polynucleotide species encompassed within the scope of the present invention because the highly stringent conditions set forth in the above formulae yield structurally similar polynucleotides.

If desired, one may employ wash steps of even greater stringency, including about 0.2×SSC, 0.1% SDS at 65° C. and washing twice, each wash step being about 30 minutes, or about 0.1×SSC, 0.1% SDS at 65° C. and washing twice for 30 minutes. The temperature for the wash solutions will ordinarily be at least about 25° C., and for greater stringency at least about 42° C. Hybridization stringency may be increased further by using the same conditions as in the hybridization steps, with the wash temperature raised about 3° C. to about 5° C., and stringency may be increased even further by using the same conditions except the wash temperature is raised about 6° C. to about 9° C. For identification of less closely related homologs, wash steps may be performed at a lower temperature, e.g., 50° C.

An example of a low stringency wash step employs a solution and conditions of at least 25° C. in 30 mM NaCl, 3 mM trisodium citrate, and 0.1% SDS over 30 minutes. Greater stringency may be obtained at 42° C. in 15 mM NaCl, with 1.5 mM trisodium citrate, and 0.1% SDS over 30 minutes. Even higher stringency wash conditions are obtained at 65° C.-68° C. in a solution of 15 mM NaCl, 1.5 mM trisodium citrate, and 0.1% SDS. Wash procedures will generally employ at least two final wash steps. Additional variations on these conditions will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art (see, for example, US Patent Application No. 20010010913).

Stringency conditions can be selected such that an oligonucleotide that is perfectly complementary to the coding oligonucleotide hybridizes to the coding oligonucleotide with at least about a 5-10× higher signal to noise ratio than the ratio for hybridization of the perfectly complementary oligonucleotide to a nucleic acid encoding a polypeptide known as of the filing date of the application. It may be desirable to select conditions for a particular assay such that a higher signal to noise ratio, that is, about 15× or more, is obtained. Accordingly, a subject nucleic acid will hybridize to a unique coding oligonucleotide with at least a 2× or greater signal to noise ratio as compared to hybridization of the coding oligonucleotide to a nucleic acid encoding known polypeptide. The particular signal will depend on the label used in the relevant assay, e.g., a fluorescent label, a colorimetric label, a radioactive label, or the like. Labeled hybridization or PCR probes for detecting related polynucleotide sequences may be produced by oligolabeling, nick translation, end-labeling, or PCR amplification using a labeled nucleotide.

Encompassed by the invention are polynucleotide sequences capable of hybridizing to the claimed polynucleotide sequences, including any of the polynucleotides within the Sequence Listing, and fragments thereof under various conditions of stringency (see, for example, Wahl and Berger, 1987, pages 399-407; and Kimmel, 1987). In addition to the nucleotide sequences in the Sequence Listing, full length cDNA, orthologs, and paralogs of the present nucleotide sequences may be identified and isolated using well-known methods. The cDNA libraries, orthologs, and paralogs of the present nucleotide sequences may be screened using hybridization methods to determine their utility as hybridization target or amplification probes.

EXAMPLES

It is to be understood that this invention is not limited to the particular devices, machines, materials and methods described. Although particular embodiments are described, equivalent embodiments may be used to practice the invention.

The invention, now being generally described, will be more readily understood by reference to the following examples, which are included merely for purposes of illustration of certain aspects and embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the invention. It will be recognized by one of skill in the art that a polypeptide that is associated with a particular first trait may also be associated with at least one other, unrelated and inherent second trait which was not predicted by the first trait.

Example I Transcription Factor Polynucleotide and Polypeptide Sequences of the Invention

Background Information for G1760, the G1760 Clade, and Related Sequences

MADS box genes comprise a large multigene family in vascular plants, and the Arabidopsis genome contains 104 of these genes. G1760 (AT4G37940, AGL21, SEQ ID NO: 2) and G3980 (SEQ ID NO: 10) fall within the G1760 clade. G1760 is most closely related to G152 (AT2G22630, AGL17G860, SEQ ID NO: 4), G860 (AT3G57230, AGL16, SEQ ID NO: 16), and G153 (AT2G14210, ANR1, SEQ ID NO: 14), all derived from Arabidopsis. G3980 is derived from soybeans. Phylogenetic analysis using the MADS box and I domains indicates that both G1760 and G860 (AT3G57230, AGL16, SEQ ID NO: 16) appear equally related to G3980.

The most well known role of plant MADS box genes is in the regulation of flower development. However, these proteins have also been shown to be important for a variety of other functions. In particular, an increasing number of MADS box proteins (such as SOC1/G154 and the MAF/FLC clade) have been found to influence the timing of flowering (Hepworth et al., 2002; Ratcliffe et al., 2003). The wide range of expression patterns of MADS box genes also suggests that their activities are not restricted to the floral realm. For instance, AGL3 is expressed in all aerial parts of the plant and AGL12, AGL14, and AGL17 are expressed only in roots (Riechmann and Meyerowitz, 1997; Alvarez-Buylla et al., 2000; Fernandez et al., 2000). Moreover, MADS box genes are involved not only in the intrinsic plant developmental programs, but also in those induced upon external stimuli. For example, ANR1 (G153), an Arabidopsis MADS box gene in the G1760 clade, controls the proliferation of lateral roots in response to nitrate (Zhang and Forde, 2000; Gan et al., 2005; Remans et al., 2006; Filleur et al., 2005). In summary, MADS-box genes have evolved to fulfill diverse roles in angiosperm plants, and as a family, play a part in regulating a very wide range of developmental and physiological processes.

MADS Box Protein Structure

The structure of MADS box proteins is well-studied, and a number of domains have been identified. The MADS domain is involved in DNA binding and dimerization (Riechmann et al., 1996; Huang et al., 1996; Tang and Perry, 2003; Immink et al., 2002), the I domain has been implicated in nuclear localization, the K domain is important for homo- and heterodimerization interactions (Davies et al., 1996; Yang et al., 2003; Lim et al., 2000; Honma and Goto 2001; Battaglia et al., 2006), and the highly divergent C-terminus is characterized as an activation domain (Lim et al., 2000). An alignment of G3980 and the G1760 Arabidopsis clade members is shown in FIG. 4, with these domains highlighted.

An alignment comparing full-length protein sequences of a larger number of G1760 clade members is presented in FIGS. 5A-5F. The sequences in FIGS. 5A-5F were identified by BLAST and phylogenetic analysis and thus determined to bear a close evolutionary relationship to the G1760 sequence. The conserved MADS domains are found within the box in FIG. 5A. Asterisks generated by Clustal indicate complete identity, colons represent highly similar residues, and dots represent similar residues throughout the alignment. SEQ ID NOs. are found in the parentheses.

Sequences found in other plant species that are closely-related to G1760 are listed in Table 1, which includes the SEQ ID NO: (Column 1); the species from which the sequence was derived (Column 2); the Gene Identifier (“GID”, in Column 3); the percent identity of the polypeptide in Column 1 to the full length G1760 polypeptide, SEQ ID NO: 1, as determined by a BLASTp analysis with a wordlength (W) of 3, an expectation (E) of 10, and the BLOSUM62 scoring matrix Henikoff & Henikoff, 1989 (Column 4); the amino acid coordinates for the conserved MADS domains, beginning at the n-terminus of each of the sequences (Column 5), the SEQ ID NO: of each conserved MADS DNA binding domain (Column 6); the conserved MADS domain sequences of the respective polypeptides (Column 7); and the percentage identity of the conserved domain in Column 6 to the conserved domain of the G1760 sequence, SEQ ID NO: 33 (Column 8). Column 8 also includes the ratio of the number of identical residues over the total number of residues compared in the respective MADS domains (in parentheses).

TABLE 1 Percentage identities and conserved domains of G1760 and closely related sequences Col. 8 Percent ID of conserved Col. 2 Col. 5 MADS DNA Species  Col. 4 Conserved Col. 6 binding from Percent MADS DNA Conserved Col. 7 domain to which SEQ Col. 3 ID of binding domain MADS DNA Conserved G1760 conserved Col. 1 ID NO: is Gene ID protein to amino acid binding domain MADS DNA MADS DNA SEQ ID NO: derived (GID) G1760 coordinates SEQ ID NO: binding domain binding domain  2 Arabidopsis G1760 100% 2-57 33 GRGKIVIQRID 100% thaliana DSTSRQVTFS (56/56) KRRKGLIKKA KELAILCDAE KGLIIFSSTGK LYDF  4 Arabidopsis G152  75% 2-57 34 GRGKIVIQKID 92.9% thaliana DSTSRQVTFS (52/56) KRRKGLIKKA KELAILCDAE VCLIIFSNTKD LYDF  6 Antirrhinum G3982 62% 2-57 35 GRGKIVIQRID 89.3% majus KSTSRQVTFS (50/56) (snap- KRRSGLLKKA dragon) KELAILCDAE VGVVIFSSTG KLYEF  8 Glycine G3485 63% 2-57 36 GRGKIVIRRID 89.3% max NSTSRQVTFS (50/56) KRRNGLLKK AKELAILCDA EVGVMIFSST GKLYDF 10 Glycine G3980 63% 2-57 37 GRGKIVIRRID 89.3% max NSTSRQVTFS (50/56) KRRNGLLKK AKELAILCDA EVGVMIFSST GKLYDF 12 Glycine G3981 63% 2-57 38 GRGKIVIRRID 89.3% max NSTSRQVTFS (50/56) KRRNGLLKK AKELAILCDA EVGVMIFSST GKLYDF 14 Arabidopsis G153  62% 1-57 39 GRGKIVIRRID 87.5% thaliana NSTSRQVTFS (49/56) KRRSGLLKKA KELSILCDAE VGVIIFSSTGK LYDY 16 Arabidopsis G860  60% 2-57 40 GRGKIAIKRIN 85.7% thaliana NSTSRQVTFS (48/56) KRRNGLLKK AKELAILCDA EVGVIIFSSTG RLYDF 18 Oryza G3479 62% 2-57 41 GRGKIVIRRID 83.9% sativa NSTSRQVTFS (47/56) KRRNGIFKKA KELAILCDAE VGLVIFSSTGR LYEY 20 Oryza G3480 63% 2-57 42 GRGKIVIRRID 83.9% sativa NSTSRQVTFS (47/56) KRRNGIFKKA KELAILCDAE VGLMIFSSTG RLYEY 22 Oryza G3481 58% 2-57 43 GRGKIVIRRID 83.9% sativa NSTSRQVTFS (47/56) KRRNGLLKK AKELSILCDA EVGLVVFSST GRLYEF 24 Zea mays G3489 66% 2-57 44 GRGKIVIRRID 83.9% NSTSRQVTFS (47/56) KRRNGIFKKA KELAILCDAE VGLVIFSSTGR LYEY 26 Glycine G3484 61% 2-57 45 GRGKIAIRRID 82.1% max NSTSRQVTFS (46/56) KRRNGLLKK ARELSISCDA EVGLMVFSST GKLYDY 28 Zea mays G3487 55% 2-57 46 GRGKIEIKRID 82.1% NATSRQVTFS (46/56) KRRGGLFKK AKELAILCDA EVGLVVFSST GRLYHF 30 Zea mays G3488 58% 2-57 47 GRGKIVIRRID 82.1% NSTSRQVTFS (46/56) KRRNGIFKKA RELAILCDAE VGLVIFSSTGR LYEY 32 Oryza G3483 71% 2-57 48 GRGKIEIKRID 78.6%  sativa NATSRQVTFS (44/56) KRRSGLFKKA RELSILCDAE VGLLVFSSTS RLYDF

A “MADS domain”, such as is found in a polypeptide member of MADS transcription factor family, is an example of a conserved domain that is characteristic of a particular transcription factor family or clade. With respect to polynucleotides encoding presently disclosed polypeptides, a conserved domain is preferably at least nine base pairs (bp) in length. A conserved domain with respect to presently disclosed polypeptides refers to a domain within a polypeptide family that exhibits a higher degree of sequence homology. Thus, the polypeptides of the invention, and their conserved domains that are characteristic of the MADS transcription factor family or clade, share at least about 55%, or at least about 56%, at least about 57%, at least about 58%, at least about 59%, at least about 60%, at least about 61%, at least about 62%, at least about 63%, at least about 64%, at least about 65%, at least about 66%, at least about 67%, at least about 68%, at least about 69%, at least about 70%, at least about 71%, at least about 72%, at least about 73%, at least about 74%, at least about 75%, at least about 76%, at least about 77%, at least about 78%, at least about 78.6%, at least about 79%, at least about 80%, at least about 81%, at least about 82%, at least about 82.1%, at least about 83%, at least about 83.9%, at least about 84%, at least about 85%, at least about 85.7%, at least about 86%, at least about 87%, at least about 87.5%, at least about 88%, at least about 89%, at least about 89.3%, at least about 90%, at least about 91%, at least about 92%, at least about 92.9%, at least about 93%, at least about 94%, at least about 95%, at least about 96%, at least about 97%, at least about 98%, at least about 99%, or about 100% amino acid residue sequence identity to a polypeptide of the invention (e.g., SEQ ID NO: 2n, where n=1 to 16) or a conserved domain of a polypeptide of the invention (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 33-48). Sequences that possess or encode for conserved domains that meet these criteria of percentage identity, and that have comparable biological activity to the present polypeptide sequences, thus being members of the G1760 clade polypeptides, are encompassed by the invention. The MADS domain (named after four members of the family: MCM1, AGAMOUS, DEFICIENS, and SRF, serum response factor) is a conserved DNA-binding/dimerization region present in a variety of transcription factors from different kingdoms (Riechmann and Meyerowitz, 1997). The MADS domains are required for conferring similar functions in the transcription factors of the invention. Overexpression in a transformed plant of a polypeptide that comprises a MADS family binding/dimerization conserved domain of the invention results in the transformed plant having larger seedling size, altered sugar sensing, increased tolerance to hyperosmotic stress, greater cold tolerance during germination and growth, greater tolerance to water deprivation, greater water use efficiency, altered flowering time, or altered C/N sensing or increased low nitrogen tolerance, as compared to a control plant.

Exemplary fragments of the sequences of the invention include fragments that comprise a conserved domain of a polypeptide of the invention, for example, the 2nd through 57th (2-57) amino acid residues of G1760 (SEQ ID NO: 2), amino acid residues 2-57 of G3980 (SEQ ID NO: 10) or amino acid residues 2-57 of G3480 (SEQ ID NO: 20).

Residues within a highly conserved region of a protein may be so conserved because of their importance to the function of that protein. Alignments of the sequences in the G1760 clade (FIGS. 4 and 5A-5F) indicate a high degree of conservation of the MADS domains, and particular residues, in clade members. In the sequences examined thus far, the MADS domain of G1760 clade members have generally been found to comprise the consensus sequence:

G-R-G-K-I-X-I-X-R/K-I-D/N-X-S/A-T-S-R-Q-V-T-F-S-K-R-R-X-G-L/I-X-K-K-A-K/R-E-L-A/S-I-L-C-D-A-E-V-G/C-L/V-X-I/V-F-S-S/N-T-X-K/R-L-Y-X-F/Y (SEQ ID NO: 62), where a slash indicates one of the two residues on either side of the slash may be present, and X can be any amino acid residue (Table 2). The last row of Table 2 shows highly conserved residues (represented by asterisks) within the consensus MADS domain of the G1760 clade. Within the MADS domains of the G1760 clade sequences examined thus far are contained the smaller conserved subsequences: STSRQVTFSKRR (SEQ ID NO: 63) and ILCDAEV (SEQ ID NO: 64).

TABLE 2 Highly conserved residues within MADS domains of the G1760 clade Gene ID MADS domain (GID) SEQ ID NO: MADS domain G1760 33 GRGKIVIQRIDDSTSRQVTFSKRRKGLIKKAKELAILCDAEVGLIIFSSTGKLYDF G3980 37 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGLLKKAKELAILCDAEVGVMIFSSTGKLYDF G152  34 GRGKIVIQKIDDSTSRQVTFSKRRKGLIKKAKELAILCDAEVCLIIFSNTDKLYDF G3982 35 GRGKIVIQRIDKSTSRQVTFSKRRSGLLKKAKELAILCDAEVGVVIFSSTGKLYEF G3485 36 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGLLKKAKELAILCDAEVGVMIFSSTGKLYDF G3981 38 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGLLKKAKELAILCDAEVGVMIFSSTGKLYDF G153  39 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRSGLLKKAKELSILCDAEVGVIIFSSTGKLYDY G860 40 GRGKIAIKRINNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGLLKKAKELAILCDAEVGVIIFSSTGRLYDF G3479 41 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGIFKKAKELAILCDAEVGLVIFSSTGRLYEY G3480 42 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGIFKKAKELAILCDAEVGLMIFSSTGRLYEY G3481 43 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGLLKKAKELSILCDAEVGLVVFSSTGRLYEF G3489 44 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGIFKKAKELAILCDAEVGLVIFSSTGRLYEY G3484 45 GRGKIAIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGLLKKARELSILCDAEVGLMVFSSTGKLYDY G3487 46 GRGKIEIKRIDNATSRQVTFSKRRGGLFKKAKELAILCDAEVGLVVFSSTGRLYHF G3488 47 GRGKIVIRRIDNSTSRQVTFSKRRNGIFKKARELAILCDAEVGLVIFSSTGRLYEY G3483 48 GRGKIEIKRIDNATSRQVTFSKRRSGLFKKARELSILCDAEVGLLVFSSTSRLYDF ***** *  *   *********** *  *** ** *******    ** *  **

Example II Project Types, Constructs and Cloning Information

A number of constructs were used to modulate the activity of sequences of the invention. An individual project was defined as the analysis of lines for a particular construct (for example, this might include G1760 lines that constitutively overexpressed a sequence of the invention). Generally, a full-length wild-type version of a gene was directly fused to a promoter that drove its expression in transformed or transgenic plants. Such a promoter could be a constitutive promoter such as the CaMV 35S promoter, or the native promoter of that gene. Alternatively, as noted below, a promoter that drives tissue specific or conditional expression could be used in similar studies.

Expression of a given polynucleotide from a particular promoter was achieved by a direct-promoter fusion construct in which that sequence was cloned directly behind the promoter of interest. A direct fusion approach has the advantage of allowing for simple genetic analysis if a given promoter-polynucleotide line is to be crossed into different genetic backgrounds at a later date.

As an alternative to direct promoter fusion, a two-component expression system was used to drive transcription factor expression as noted below. For the two-component system, two separate constructs were used: Promoter::LexA-GAL4TA and opLexA::TF. The first of these (Promoter::LexA-GAL4TA) comprised a desired promoter cloned in front of a LexA DNA binding domain fused to a GAL4 activation domain. The construct vector backbone also carried a kanamycin resistance marker, along with an opLexA::GFP reporter. Transgenic lines were obtained containing this first component, and a line was selected that showed reproducible expression of the reporter gene in the desired pattern through a number of generations. A homozygous population was established for that line, and the population was supertransformed with the second construct (opLexA::TF) carrying the transcription factor sequence of interest cloned behind a LexA operator site. This second construct vector backbone also contained a sulfonamide resistance marker.

Each of the above methods offers a number of pros and cons. A direct fusion approach allows for much simpler genetic analysis if a given promoter-transcription factor line was to be crossed into different genetic backgrounds at a later date. The two-component method, on the other hand, potentially allows for stronger expression to be obtained via an amplification of transcription.

In general, the lead transcription factor from each study group was expressed from a range of different promoters using a two component method. Arabidopsis paralogs were also generally analyzed by the two-component method, but were typically analyzed using the only 35S promoter. However, an alternative promoter was sometimes used for paralogs when there was already a specific indication that a different promoter might afford a more useful approach (such as when use of the 35S promoter was already known to generate deleterious effects). Putative orthologs from other species were usually analyzed by overexpression from a 35S CaMV promoter via a direct promoter-fusion construct.

For analysis of G1760-overexpressing plants, transgenic lines were created with the expression vector P1461 (SEQ ID NO: 49), which contained a G1760 cDNA clone. This construct constituted a 35S::G1760 direct promoter-fusion carrying a kanamycin resistance marker and was introduced into Arabidopsis plants.

A list of other constructs (PIDs) included in this report, indicating the promoter fragment that was used, or may be used, to drive the transgene, along with the cloning vector backbone, is provided in Table 3. Compilations of the sequences of promoter fragments and the expressed transgene sequences within the PIDs are provided in the Sequence Listing.

TABLE 3 Sequences of promoter fragments and the expressed transgene sequences SEQ ID NO: Construct Construct PID of PID Promoter Expression system 35S::G1760 P1461 49 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G152 P896 50 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3981 P26747 51 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G153 P15260 52 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G860 P1269 53 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3479 P26738 54 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3480 P21388 55 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3481 P26740 56 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3489 P26743 57 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3484 P26744 58 35S Direct promoter- fusion 35S::G3487 P26820 59 35S Direct promoter- fusion G1760 (two components: P6506 and 61 and 35S Two-component opLexA::G1760 and P3371 65 super 35S::m35S::oEnh::LexAGal4) transformation construct containing cDNA clone of G1760 and promoter::LexA- GAL4TA construct in two- component system SUC2 promoter and G1760 P5290 and 65 and Vascular Two-component (two components: P3371 66 tissue- super opLexA::G1760 and specific transformation prSUC2::m35S::oEnh::LexAGal4(GFP)) SUC2 construct containing cDNA clone of G1760 and promoter::LexA- GAL4TA construct in two- component system prAt5g52300::G1760 Drought 67 Drought Direct promoter- inducible inducible fusion promoter expression prAt5g52300 fused to G1760 prAT5G43840::G1760 Drought 68 Drought Direct promoter- inducible inducible fusion promoter expression prAT5G43840 fused to G1760 SUC2::G1760 P28765 69 Vascular Direct promoter- tissue- fusion specific SUC2 G1760 (two components: P3371 and 70 Root- Two-component opLexA::G1760 and P5310 specific super prRSI1::m35S::oEnh::LexAGal4(GFP)) RSI1 transformation construct containing cDNA clone of G1760 G1760 (two components: P3371 and 71 Root- Two-component opLexA::G1760 and P5311 specific super prARSK1::m35S::oEnh::LexAGal4(GFP)) ARSK1 transformation construct containing cDNA clone of G1760 G1760 (prGmF6::G1760) P28771 72 Abscission Direct promoter- zone- fusion specific promoter prGmF6 G1760(prCYCD3::G1760) P28778 73 Dividing Direct promoter- tissue- fusion specific promoter prCYCD3 G1760 (prCAB1::G1760) P28752 74 Green Direct promoter- tissue- fusion specific promoter prCAB1

Example III Transformation Methods

Transformation of Arabidopsis was performed by an Agrobacterium-mediated protocol based on the method of Bechtold and Pelletier, 1998. Unless otherwise specified, all experimental work was done using the Columbia ecotype.

Plant preparation. Arabidopsis seeds were sown on mesh covered pots. The seedlings were thinned so that 6-10 evenly spaced plants remained on each pot 10 days after planting. The primary bolts were cut off a week before transformation to break apical dominance and encourage auxiliary shoots to form. Transformation was typically performed at 4-5 weeks after sowing.

Bacterial culture preparation. Agrobacterium stocks were inoculated from single colony plates or from glycerol stocks and grown with the appropriate antibiotics and grown until saturation. On the morning of transformation, the saturated cultures were centrifuged and bacterial pellets were re-suspended in Infiltration Media (0.5×MS, 1× B5 Vitamins, 5% sucrose, 1 mg/ml benzylaminopurine riboside, 200 μl/L Silwet L77) until an A600 reading of 0.8 was reached.

Transformation and seed harvest. The Agrobacterium solution was poured into dipping containers. All flower buds and rosette leaves of the plants were immersed in this solution for 30 seconds. The plants were laid on their side and wrapped to keep the humidity high. The plants were kept this way overnight at 4° C. and then the pots were turned upright, unwrapped, and moved to the growth racks.

The plants were maintained on the growth rack under 24-hour light until seeds were ready to be harvested. Seeds were harvested when 80% of the siliques of the transformed plants were ripe (approximately 5 weeks after the initial transformation). This transformed seed was deemed T0 seed, since it was obtained from the T0 generation, and was later plated on selection plates (either kanamycin or sulfonamide). Resistant plants that were identified on such selection plates comprised the T1 generation.

Example IV Morphology

Morphological analysis was performed to determine whether changes in polypeptide levels affect plant growth and development. This was primarily carried out on the T1 generation, when at least 10-20 independent lines were examined. However, in cases where a phenotype required confirmation or detailed characterization, plants from subsequent generations were also analyzed.

Primary transformants were selected on MS medium with 0.3% sucrose and 50 mg/l kanamycin. T2 and later generation plants were selected in the same manner, except that kanamycin was used at 35 mg/l. In cases where lines carry a sulfonamide marker (as in all lines generated by super-transformation), Transformed seeds were selected on MS medium with 0.3% sucrose and 1.5 mg/l sulfonamide. KO lines were usually germinated on plates without a selection. Seeds were cold-treated (stratified) on plates for three days in the dark (in order to increase germination efficiency) prior to transfer to growth cabinets. Initially, plates were incubated at 22° C. under a light intensity of approximately 100 microEinsteins for 7 days. At this stage, transformants were green, possessed the first two true leaves, and were easily distinguished from bleached kanamycin or sulfonamide-susceptible seedlings. Resistant seedlings were then transferred onto soil (Sunshine potting mix, Sun Gro Horticulture, Bellevue, Wash.). Following transfer to soil, trays of seedlings were covered with plastic lids for 2-3 days to maintain humidity while they became established. Plants were grown on soil under fluorescent light at an intensity of 70-95 microEinsteins and a temperature of 18-23° C. Light conditions consisted of a 24-hour photoperiod unless otherwise stated. In instances where alterations in flowering time were apparent, flowering time was re-examined under both 12-hour and 24-hour light to assess whether the phenotype was photoperiod dependent. Under our 24-hour light growth conditions, the typical generation time (seed to seed) was approximately 14 weeks.

Because many aspects of Arabidopsis development are dependent on localized environmental conditions, in all cases plants were evaluated in comparison to controls in the same flat. As noted below, controls for transformed lines were wild-type plants or transformed plants harboring an empty transformation vector selected on kanamycin or sulfonamide. Careful examination was made at the following stages: seedling (1 week), rosette (2-3 weeks), flowering (4-7 weeks), and late seed set (8-12 weeks). Seed was also inspected. Seedling morphology was assessed on selection plates. At all other stages, plants were macroscopically evaluated while growing on soil. All significant differences (including alterations in growth rate, size, leaf and flower morphology, coloration, and flowering time) were recorded, but routine measurements were not taken if no differences were apparent.

Note that for a given project (gene-promoter combination, GAL4 fusion lines, RNAi lines etc.), up to ten lines were typically examined in subsequent plate based physiology assays.

Example V Physiology Experimental Methods

In subsequent Examples, unless otherwise indicted, morphological and physiological traits are disclosed in comparison to wild-type control plants. That is, a transformed plant that is described as large and/or drought tolerant was large and more tolerant to drought with respect to a control plant, the latter including wild-type plants, parental lines and lines transformed with an “empty” vector that does not contain a transcription factor polynucleotide sequence of interest. When a plant is said to have a better performance than controls, it generally was larger, had greater yield, and/or showed less stress symptoms than control plants. The better performing lines may, for example, have produced less anthocyanin, or were larger, greener, or more vigorous in response to a particular stress, as noted below. Better performance generally implies greater size or yield, or tolerance to a particular biotic or abiotic stress, less sensitivity to ABA, or better recovery from a stress (as in the case of a soil-based drought treatment) than controls.

Plate assays. Different plate-based physiological assays (shown below), representing a variety of abiotic and water-deprivation-stress related conditions, were used as a pre-screen to identify top performing lines (i.e. lines from transformation with a particular construct), that were generally then tested in subsequent soil based assays. Typically, ten lines were subjected to plate assays, from which the best three lines were selected for subsequent soil based assays. However, in projects where significant stress tolerance was not obtained in plate based assays, lines were not submitted for soil assays.

In addition, some projects were subjected to nutrient limitation studies. A nutrient limitation assay was intended to find genes that allowed more plant growth upon deprivation of nitrogen. Nitrogen is a major nutrient affecting plant growth and development that ultimately impacts yield and stress tolerance. These assays monitored primarily root but also shoot growth on nitrogen deficient media. In all higher plants, inorganic nitrogen is first assimilated into glutamate, glutamine, aspartate and asparagine, the four amino acids used to transport assimilated nitrogen from sources (e.g. leaves) to sinks (e.g. developing seeds). This process is regulated by light, as well as by C/N metabolic status of the plant. A C/N sensing assay was thus used to look for alterations in the mechanisms plants use to sense internal levels of carbon and nitrogen metabolites which could activate signal transduction cascades that regulate the transcription of nitrogen-assimilatory genes. To determine whether these mechanisms are altered, we exploited the observation that wild-type plants grown on media containing high levels of sucrose (3%) without a nitrogen source accumulate high levels of anthocyanins. This sucrose induced anthocyanin accumulation can be relieved by the addition of either inorganic or organic nitrogen. We used glutamine as a nitrogen source since it also serves as a compound used to transport nitrogen in plants.

Germination assays. The following germination assays were conducted with Arabidopsis overexpressors of G1760 and closely-related sequences: NaCl (150 mM), mannitol (300 mM), sucrose (9.4%), ABA (0.3 μM), cold (8° C.), polyethlene glycol (10%, with Phytogel as gelling agent), or C/N sensing or low nitrogen medium. In the text below, −N refers to basal media minus nitrogen plus 3% sucrose and −N/+Gln is basal media minus nitrogen plus 3% sucrose and 1 mM glutamine.

All germination assays were performed in aseptic conditions. Growing the plants under controlled temperature and humidity on sterile medium produces uniform plant material that has not been exposed to additional stresses (such as water stress) which could cause variability in the results obtained. All assays were designed to detect plants that were more tolerant or less tolerant to the particular stress condition and were developed with reference to the following publications: Jang et al., 1997, Smeekens, 1998, Liu and Zhu, 1997, Saleki et al., 1993, Wu et al., 1996, Zhu et al., 1998, Alia et al., 1998, Xin and Browse, 1998, Leon-Kloosterziel et al., 1996. Where possible, assay conditions were originally tested in a blind experiment with controls that had phenotypes related to the condition tested.

Prior to plating, seed for all experiments were surface sterilized in the following manner: (1) 5 minute incubation with mixing in 70% ethanol, (2) 20 minute incubation with mixing in 30% bleach, 0.01% triton-X 100, (3) 5× rinses with sterile water, (4) Seeds were re-suspended in 0.1% sterile agarose and stratified at 40° C. for 3-4 days.

All germination assays follow modifications of the same basic protocol. Sterile seeds were sown on the conditional media that has a basal composition of 80% MS+Vitamins. Plates were incubated at 22° C. under 24-hour light (120-130 μE m⁻² s⁻¹) in a growth chamber. Evaluation of germination and seedling vigor was performed five days after planting.

Growth assays. The following growth assays were conducted with Arabidopsis overexpressors of G1760 and closely-related sequences: severe desiccation (a type of water deprivation assay), growth in cold conditions at 8° C., root development (visual assessment of lateral and primary roots, root hairs and overall growth), and phosphate limitation. For the nitrogen limitation assay, plants were grown in 80% Murashige and Skoog (MS) medium in which the nitrogen source was reduced to 20 mg/L of NH₄NO₃. Note that 80% MS normally has 1.32 g/L NH₄NO₃ and 1.52 g/L KNO₃. For phosphate limitation assays, seven day old seedlings were germinated on phosphate-free medium in MS medium in which KH₂PO₄ was replaced by K₂SO₄.

Unless otherwise stated, all experiments were performed with the Arabidopsis thaliana ecotype Columbia (col-0), soybean or maize plants. Assays were usually conducted on non-selected segregating T2 populations (in order to avoid the extra stress of selection). Control plants for assays on lines containing direct promoter-fusion constructs were Col-0 plants transformed an empty transformation vector (pMEN65). Controls for 2-component lines (generated by supertransformation) were the background promoter-driver lines (i.e. promoter::LexA-GAL4TA lines), into which the supertransformations were initially performed.

Procedures

For chilling growth assays, seeds were germinated and grown for seven days on MS+Vitamins+1% sucrose at 22° C. and then transferred to chilling conditions at 8° C. and evaluated after another 10 days and 17 days.

For severe desiccation (plate-based water deficit) assays, seedlings were grown for 14 days on MS+Vitamins+1% Sucrose at 22° C. Plates were opened in the sterile laminar flow hood for 3 hr for hardening and then seedlings were removed from the media and let dry for two hours in the hood. After this time the plants were transferred back to plates and incubated at 22° C. for recovery. The plants were then evaluated after five days.

For the polyethylene glycol (PEG) hyperosmotic stress tolerance screen, plant seeds were gas sterilized with chlorine gas for 2 hrs. The seeds were plated on each plate containing 3% PEG, 1/2×MS salts, 1% phytagel, and 10 μg/ml glufosinate-ammonium (BASTA). Two replicate plates per seed line were planted. The plates were placed at 4° C. for 3 days to stratify seeds. The plates were held vertically for 11 additional days at temperatures of 22° C. (day) and 20° C. (night). The photoperiod was 16 hrs. with an average light intensity of about 120 μmol/m2/s. The racks holding the plates were rotated daily within the shelves of the growth chamber carts. At 11 days, root length measurements are made. At 14 days, seedling status was determined, root length was measured, growth stage was recorded, the visual color was assessed, pooled seedling fresh weight was measured, and a whole plate photograph was taken.

Wilt screen assay. Transformed and wild-type soybean plants were grown in 5″ pots in growth chambers. After the seedlings reached the V1 stage (the V1 stage occurs when the plants have one trifoliolate, and the unifoliolate and first trifoliolate leaves are unrolled), water was withheld and the drought treatment thus started. A drought injury phenotype score was recorded, in increasing severity of effect, as 1 to 4, with 1 designated no obvious effect and 4 indicating a dead plant. Drought scoring was initiated as soon as one plant in one growth chamber had a drought score of 1.5. Scoring continued every day until at least 90% of the wild type plants had achieved scores of 3.5 or more. At the end of the experiment the scores for both transgenic and wild type soybean seedlings were statistically analyzed using Risk Score and Survival analysis methods (Glantz, 2001; Hosmer and Lemeshow, 1999).

Water Use Efficiency (WUE).

Long term WUE may be estimated using a method similar to that described by Nienhuis et al. (1994). Seeds of transformants and controls are suspended in 0.1% agarose and stratified for 3 days at 4° C. The agarose/seed suspension is germinated under 12 hour light at 22° C. for 2 days. Germinated seeds are then planted into Petri dishes containing a known amount of soil. Each lid is spray painted black to reduce algae growth on soil and to ensure plant germination from a 3.2 mm diameter hole drilled into the top of the Petri dish lid. Plates are sealed with a layer of parafilm and a layer of 3M venting tape and grown under 12 hr light at 22° C. Rosettes are harvested after 29 days. To keep humidity high, plates are placed in trays covered with plastic wrap. Water use efficiency is calculated by taking the fresh or dry rosette weight and dividing by the weight of water used. The amount of water lost by transpiration through the plant is estimated by subtracting the (plate+soil) final weight from the (plate+soil) initial weight. Data from 20 to 40 samples per line may be averaged together to give a mean and standard deviation.

Another potential indicator of WUE is stomatal conductance, that is, the extent to which stomata were open.

Data Interpretation

At the time of evaluation, plants were given one of the following scores:

-   (++) Substantially enhanced performance compared to controls. The     phenotype was very consistent and growth was significantly above the     normal levels of variability observed for that assay. -   (+) Enhanced performance compared to controls. The response was     consistent but was only moderately above the normal levels of     variability observed for that assay. -   (wt) No detectable difference from wild-type controls. -   (−) Impaired performance compared to controls. The response was     consistent but was only moderately above the normal levels of     variability observed for that assay. -   (−−) Substantially impaired performance compared to controls. The     phenotype was consistent and growth was significantly above the     normal levels of variability observed for that assay. -   (n/d) Experiment failed, data not obtained, or assay not performed.

Example VI Soil Drought (Clay Pot)

The Arabidopsis soil drought assay (water deficit assays performed in clay pots) may be performed using a method based on that described by Haake et al., 2002.

Experimental Procedure.

Seedlings are first germinated on selection plates containing either kanamycin or sulfonamide.

Seeds are sterilized by a 2 minute ethanol treatment followed by 20 minutes in 30% bleach/0.01% Tween and five washes in distilled water. Seeds are sown to MS agar in 0.1% agarose and stratified for three days at 4° C., before transfer to growth cabinets with a temperature of 22° C. After seven days of growth on selection plates, seedlings are transplanted to 3.5 inch diameter clay pots containing 80 g of a 50:50 mix of vermiculite:perlite topped with 80 g of ProMix. Typically, each pot contained 14 seedlings, and plants of the transformed line being tested are in separate pots to the wild-type controls. Pots containing the transgenic line versus control pots are interspersed in the growth room, maintained under 24-hour light conditions (18-23° C., and 90-100 μE m⁻² s⁻¹) and watered for a period of 14 days. Water is then withheld and pots are placed on absorbent paper for a period of 8-10 days to apply a drought treatment. After this period, a visual qualitative “drought score” from 0-6 is assigned to record the extent of visible drought stress symptoms. A score of “6” corresponds to no visible symptoms whereas a score of “0” corresponds to extreme wilting and the leaves having a “crispy” texture. At the end of the drought period, pots are re-watered and scored after 5-6 days; the number of surviving plants in each pot is counted, and the proportion of the total plants in the pot that survived is calculated.

Analysis of results. In a given experiment, five or more pots of a transformed line are typically compared with five or more pots of the appropriate control. The mean drought score and mean proportion of plants surviving (survival rate) are calculated for both the transformed line and the wild-type pots. In each case a p-value* is calculated, which indicates the significance of the difference between the two mean values. The p-value may be calculated with a Mann-Whitney rank-sum test.

Example VII Soil Drought Physiological and Biochemical Measurements

These experiments determine the physiological basis for the drought tolerance conferred by each lead and are typically performed under soil grown conditions. Usually, the experiment is performed under photoperiodic conditions of 10-hr or 12-hr light. Where possible, a given project (gene/promoter combination or protein variant) is represented by three independent lines. Plants are usually at late vegetative/early reproductive stage at the time measurements are taken. Typically we assay three different states: a well-watered state, a mild-drought state and a moderately severe drought state. In each case, we make comparisons to wild-type plants with the same degree of physical stress symptoms (wilting). To achieve this, staggered samplings are often required. Typically, for a given line, ten individual plants are assayed for each state.

The following physiological parameters are routinely measured: relative water content, ABA content, proline content, and photosynthesis rate. In some cases, measurements of chlorophyll levels, starch levels, carotenoid levels, and chlorophyll fluorescence are also made.

Analysis of results. In a given experiment, for a particular parameter, we typically compare about 10 samples from a given transformed line with about 10 samples of the appropriate wild-type control at each drought state. The mean values for each physiological parameter are calculated for both the transformed line and the wild-type pots. In each case, a p-value (calculated via a simple t-test) is determined, which indicates the significance of the difference between the two mean values.

A typical procedure is described below; this corresponds to method used for the drought time-course experiment which we perform on wild-type plants during our baseline studies at the outset of the drought program.

Procedure. Seeds are stratified for three days at 4° C. in 0.1% agarose and sown on Metromix 200 in 2.25 inch pots (square or round). Plants are maintained in individual pots within flats grown under short days (10 hours light, 14 hours dark). Seedlings are watered as needed to maintain healthy plant growth and development. At 7 to 8 weeks after planting, plants are used in drought experiments.

Plants matched for equivalent growth development (rosette size) are removed from plastic flats and placed on absorbent paper. Pots containing plants used as well-watered controls are placed within a weigh boat and the dish placed on the absorbent paper. The purpose of the weigh boat is to retain any water that might leak from well-watered pots and affect pots containing plants undergoing the drought stress treatment.

On each day of sampling, up to 18 plants subjected to drought conditions and 6 well-watered controls (from each transformed line) are picked from a randomly generated pool. Biochemical analysis for photosynthesis, ABA, and proline is performed on the next three youngest, most fully expanded leaves. Relative water content is analyzed using the remaining rosette tissue.

Measurement of Photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is measured using a LICOR LI-6400 (Li-Cor Biosciences, Lincoln, Nebr.). The LI-6400 uses infrared gas analyzers to measure carbon dioxide to generate a photosynthesis measurement. It is based upon the difference of the CO₂ reference (the amount put into the chamber) and the CO₂ sample (the amount that leaves the chamber). Since photosynthesis is the process of converting CO₂ to carbohydrates, we expect to see a decrease in the amount of CO₂ sample. From this difference, a photosynthesis rate can be generated. In some cases, respiration may occur and an increase in CO₂ detected. To perform measurements, the LI-6400 is set-up and calibrated as per LI-6400 standard directions. Photosynthesis is measured in the youngest, most fully expanded leaf at 300 and 1000 ppm CO₂ using a metal halide light source. This light source provides about 700 μE m⁻² s⁻¹.

Fluorescence is measured in dark and light adapted leaves using either a LI-6400 (LICOR) with a leaf chamber fluorometer attachment or an OS-1 (Opti-Sciences, Hudson, N.H.) as described in the manufacturer's literature. When the LI-6400 is used, all manipulations are performed under a dark shade cloth. Plants are dark adapted by placing in a box under this shade cloth until used. The OS-30 uses small clips to create dark adapted leaves.

Chlorophyll/carotenoid determination. For some experiments, chlorophyll is estimated in methanolic extracts using the method of Porra et al., 1989. Carotenoids are estimated in the same extract at 450 nm using an A (1%) of 2500. We measure chlorophyll using a Minolta SPAD-502 (Konica Minolta Sensing Americas, Inc., Ramsey, N.J.). When the SPAD-502 is used to measure chlorophyll, both carotenoid and chlorophyll content and amount can also be determined via HPLC. Pigments are extracted from leave tissue by homogenizing leaves in acetone:ethyl acetate (3:2). Water is added, the mixture centrifuged, and the upper phase removed for HPLC analysis. Samples are analyzed using a Zorbax (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, Calif.) C18 (non-endcapped) column (250×4.6) with a gradient of acetonitrile:water (85:15) to acetonitrile:methanol (85:15) in 12.5 minutes. After holding at these conditions for two minutes, solvent conditions are changed to methanol:ethyl acetate (68:32) in two minutes.

Carotenoids and chlorophylls are quantified using peak areas and response factors calculated using lutein and beta-carotene as standards.

Phenotypic Analysis: Flowering time. Plants are grown in soil. Flowering time is determined based on either or both of (i) number to days after planting to the first visible flower bud. (ii) the total number of leaves (rosette or rosette plus cauline) produced by the primary shoot meristem.

Screening for Water Use Efficiency

An aspect of this invention provides transgenic plants with enhanced water use efficiency and/or water deprivation tolerance.

This example describes a high-throughput method for greenhouse selection of transgenic plants to wild type plants (tested as inbreds or hybrids) for water use efficiency. This selection process imposed three drought/re-water cycles on the plants over a total period of 15 days after an initial stress free growth period of 11 days. Each cycle consisted of five days, with no water being applied for the first four days and a water quenching on the fifth day of the cycle. The primary phenotypes analyzed by the selection method were the changes in plant growth rate as determined by height and biomass during a vegetative drought treatment. The hydration status of the shoot tissues following the drought was also measured. The plant heights were measured at three time points. The first was taken just prior to the onset drought when the plant was 11 days old, which was the shoot initial height (SIH). The plant height was also measured halfway throughout the drought/re-water regimen, on day 18 after planting, to give rise to the shoot mid-drought height (SMH). Upon the completion of the final drought cycle on day 26 after planting, the shoot portion of the plant was harvested and measured for a final height, which was the shoot wilt height (SWH) and also measured for shoot wilted biomass (SWM). The shoot was placed in water at 40° C. in the dark. Three days later, the weight of the shoot was determined to provide the shoot turgid weight (STM). After drying in an oven for four days, the weights of the shoots were determined to provide shoot dry biomass (SDM). The shoot average height (SAH) was the mean plant height across the three height measurements. If desired, the procedure described above may be adjusted for +/−˜one day for each step. To correct for slight differences between plants, a size corrected growth value was derived from SIH and SWH. This was the Relative Growth Rate (RGR). Relative Growth Rate (RGR) was calculated for each shoot using the formula [RGR %=(SWH−SIH)/((SWH+SIH)/2)*100]. Relative water content (RWC) is a measurement of how much (%) of the plant was water at harvest. Water Content (RWC) was calculated for each shoot using the formula [RWC %=(SWM−SDM)/(STM−SDM)*100]. For example, fully watered corn plants of this stage of development have around 98% RWC.

Example VIII Morphological Observations and Physiological Experimental Results

All observations are made with respect to control plants, including wild-type and non-transformed plant lines (i.e., lines that were not overexpressing a G1760 clade member).

G1760 (SEQ ID NO: 2)

A significant number of Arabidopsis plant lines overexpressing G1760 (SEQ ID NO: 2) under the control of the 35S promoter (35S::G1760) were more tolerant to hyperosmotic stress, demonstrated in 9.4% sucrose media or dehydration (a water deficit assay) plate-based assays.

A number of independent G1760 constitutive overexpressors in Arabidopis were also more tolerant to cold (8° C.) and showed a low nitrogen tolerant phenotype in plate-based cold and C/N sensing germination assays, respectively.

When overexpressed in a two-component constitutive system under the control of the CaMV 35S promoter (opLexA::G1760 and 35S::m35S::oEnh::LexAGal4), seedlings of G1760 overexpressing Arabidopsis lines were more tolerant to 9.4% sucrose (an indication of altered sugar sensing and/or increased tolerance to hyperosmotic stress) and produced less anthocyanin at 8° C. (indicating improved cold tolerance) than control plants. Seedlings of direct fusion promoter::TF (35S::G1760) and two component overexpressors were also found to be more tolerant to low nitrogen conditions than controls in a C/N sensing assay.

Seedlings from two of ten two-component constitutive overexpressor lines for G1760 in Arabidopsis were also observed to be slightly larger than controls following germination, a potential indicator of seedling vigor.

An early flowering phenotype was observed in both Arabidopsis and soybean lines overexpressing G1760 under the regulatory control of the CaMV 35S promoter. Arabidopsis plants overexpressing G1760 under the regulatory control of the SUC2 promoter, which confers expression in the phloem, also exhibited accelerated flowering. Plants from a single line of 35S::G1760 were also noted, on one particular plant date, to have a delay in the abscission of petals, following pollination.

Relative to control plants, field grown soybean lines which overexpressed G1760 from a 35S CaMV promoter produced an increased number of pods per node, an increased number of nodes per plant, and increased chlorophyll content. Early flowering, relative to control plants, was also observed, but maturity was delayed by several days. Soy plants overexpressing G1760 were generally taller than controls.

Maize plants overexpressing G1760 were also found to be early flowering. The maize G1760 overexpressors were more tolerant to water deficit, as the plants were found to have greater shoot mass and significantly greater vegetative and reproductive success than controls when grown under water deficit conditions in greenhouse and field trials.

Arabidopsis G153 (SEQ ID NO: 14)

Similar to G1760, G153 (SEQ ID NO: 14) overexpressing Arabidopsis lines (35S::G153) showed a low nitrogen tolerant phenotype in plate-based C/N sensing germination assays compared to control Arabidopsis plants.

G153 overexpressing Arabidopsis seedlings were also more tolerant to 9.4% sucrose than control plants, indicating that G153 can confer increased hyperosmotic stress tolerance.

G153 overexpressing Arabidopsis seedlings were moderately more tolerant to germination in cold conditions (8° C.) than control plants.

An early flowering phenotype was observed in Arabidopsis lines overexpressing G153 under the regulatory control of the CaMV 35S promoter

Arabidopsis G152 (SEQ ID NO: 4)

G152 (SEQ ID NO: 4) overexpressing Arabidopsis seedlings were more tolerant to 9.4% sucrose than control plants, indicating that G152 can confer increased hyperosmotic stress tolerance.

G152-overexpressing Arabidopsis lines (35S::G152) were found to be slightly more tolerant to cold (8° C.) conditions than control Arabidopsis plants in plate-based cold germination assays.

After five days of growth, some 35S::G152 lines were noted to be slightly larger than control lines, a potential indicator of seedling vigor.

Arabidopsis G860 (SEQ ID NO: 16)

G860 (SEQ ID NO: 16) overexpressing Arabidopsis seedlings were more tolerant to 9.4% sucrose than control plants, indicating that G860 can confer increased hyperosmotic stress tolerance.

Similar to G1760, G860 overexpressing Arabidopsis lines (35S::G860) showed a low nitrogen tolerant phenotype in plate-based C/N sensing germination assays than control Arabidopsis plants. 35S::G860 lines were also noted to be more tolerant to cold (8° C.) conditions than control Arabidopsis plants in germination assays.

An early flowering/accelerated development phenotype was also observed in a minority (five of twenty) Arabidopsis lines overexpressing G860 under the regulatory control of the CaMV 35S promoter.

Soy G3980 (SEQ ID NO: 10)

Morphologically, soybean lines overexpressing soy-derived sequence G3980 (SEQ ID NO: 10) under the regulatory control of the CaMV 35S promoter were similar in many ways to soy plants overexpressing Arabidopsis G1760. An early flowering phenotype was observed in 35S::G3980 transgenic lines in both soy plants and Arabidopsis. Similar to the traits conferred by the Arabidopsis sequence, soy plants overexpressing the soy sequence also had more nodes per plant. These plants also had enhanced floral and pod retention, and demonstrated a delay in maturation relative to controls.

G3980-overexpressing Arabidopsis lines (35S::G3980) were found to show less evidence of cold stress than control plants in plate-based cold germination assays carried out at 8° C.

In maize plants, G3980 (SEQ ID NO: 10) was also introduced into maize plants by way of an expression vector under the regulatory control of the rice actin constitutive promoter and shown to improve performance under water deficit conditions. Overexpression of G3980 in corn conferred early flowering and provided enhanced drought tolerance in a number of separate trials in a greenhouse screen, and improved tolerance to water deprivation in both a leaf wilt and ear damage screen performed under drought conditions in the field.

Soybean lines that overexpressed G3980 from a 35S CaMV promoter also exhibited drought tolerance. Thus, like G1760 from Arabidopsis, G3980 from soy was shown to improve water deficit tolerance.

The G1760 Clade and Altered Flowering Time

As detailed above, a number of G1760 clade members were shown to confer early flowering and/or development under the control of the 35S promoter in Arabidopsis plants. These included G1760 (SEQ ID NO: 2), G153 (SEQ ID NO: 14), G860 (SEQ ID NO: 16), G3479 (SEQ ID NO: 18), and G3484 (SEQ ID NO: 26) and G3980 (SEQ ID NO: 10). 35S::G3484 Arabidopsis lines also exhibited a delay in the abscission of floral organs, following pollination, as was noted with G1760. Such a trait comprising enhanced floral organ retention would have potential utility in ornamental species and could prolong the period of bloom or shelf life of cut-flowers. G152, G3981, and G3480 have not yet been shown to confer early flowering in Arabidopsis plants.

Thus, a number of potentially valuable traits may be conferred by G1760 and its closely related sequences found in Table 1. Morphological and physiological improvements can be conferred to crop plants such as, for example, soy, cotton, corn, ornamentals, and plants grown as biofuel feedstocks, including increased yield, increased tolerance to low nitrogen conditions, increased tolerance to cold, and/or increased tolerance to hyperosmotic stress, such as drought or other forms of water deprivation.

Example IX Transformation of Dicots to Produce Increased Yield and/or Abiotic Stress Tolerance

Crop species that overexpress polypeptides of the invention may produce plants with increased water deprivation tolerance, cold and/or nutrient tolerance and/or yield in both stressed and non-stressed conditions. Thus, polynucleotide sequences listed in the Sequence Listing recombined into, for example, one of the nucleic acid constructs of the invention, or another suitable expression construct or delivery system, may be introduced into a plant for the purpose of modifying plant traits for the purpose of improving yield and/or quality. The nucleic acid construct may contain a constitutive, tissue-specific or inducible promoter operably linked to the polynucleotide. The nucleic acid construct may be introduced into a variety of plants by means well known in the art such as, for example, direct DNA transfer or Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. It is now routine to produce transgenic plants using most eudicot plants (see Weissbach and Weissbach, 1989; Gelvin et al., 1990; Herrera-Estrella et al., 1983; Bevan, 1984; and Klee, 1985). Methods for analysis of traits are routine in the art and examples are disclosed above.

Numerous protocols for the transformation of eudicots, for example, tomato, cotton and soy plants, have been previously described, and are well known in the art. Gruber et al., 1993, in Glick and Thompson, 1993, describe several expression vectors and culture methods that may be used for cell or tissue transformation and subsequent regeneration. For soybean transformation, methods are described by Miki et al., 1993; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,563,055 to Townsend and Thomas. See also U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,624,344, 6,620,990, and 6,573,437, to Rangan, Anderson et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,479,287 to Reichert et al., and U.S. Pat. No. 6,483,013 to Reynaerts et al., which all describe cotton transformation.

There are a substantial number of alternatives to Agrobacterium-mediated transformation protocols, other methods for the purpose of transferring exogenous genes into soybeans or tomatoes. One such method is microprojectile-mediated transformation, in which DNA on the surface of microprojectile particles is driven into plant tissues with a biolistic device (see, for example, Sanford et al., 1987; Christou et al., 1992; Sanford, 1993; Klein et al., 1987; U.S. Pat. No. 5,015,580 to Christou et al.; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,322,783 to Tomes et al).

Alternatively, sonication methods (see, for example, Zhang et al., 1991); direct uptake of DNA into protoplasts using CaCl₂ precipitation, polyvinyl alcohol or poly-L-ornithine (see, for example, Hain et al., 1985; Draper et al., 1982); liposome or spheroplast fusion (see, for example, Deshayes et al., 1985; Christou et al., 1987; and electroporation of protoplasts and whole cells and tissues (see, for example, Donn et al., 1990; D'Halluin et al., 1992; and Spencer et al., 1994) have been used to introduce foreign DNA and expression vectors into plants.

After a plant or plant cell is transformed (and the latter regenerated into a plant), the transformed plant may be crossed with itself or a plant from the same line, a non-transformed or wild-type plant, or another transformed plant from a different transgenic line of plants. Crossing provides the advantages of producing new and often stable transgenic varieties. Genes and the traits they confer that have been introduced into a tomato or soybean line may be moved into distinct line of plants using traditional backcrossing techniques well known in the art. Transformation of tomato plants may be conducted using the protocols of Koornneef et al., 1986, and in Vos, et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,613,962, the latter method described in brief here. Eight day old cotyledon explants are precultured for 24 hours in Petri dishes containing a feeder layer of suspension cells plated on MS medium with 2% (w/v) sucrose and 0.8% agar supplemented with 10 μM α-naphthalene acetic acid and 4.4 μM 6-benzylaminopurine. The explants are then infected with a diluted overnight culture of Agrobacterium tumefaciens containing a nucleic acid construct comprising a polynucleotide of the invention for 5-10 minutes, blotted dry on sterile filter paper and cocultured for 48 hours on the original feeder layer plates. Culture conditions are as described above. Overnight cultures of Agrobacterium tumefaciens are diluted in liquid MS medium with 2% (w/v/) sucrose, pH 5.7) to an OD₆₀₀ of 0.8.

Following cocultivation, the cotyledon explants are transferred to Petri dishes with selective medium comprising MS medium with 4.56 μM zeatin, 67.3 μM vancomycin, 418.9 μM cefotaxime and 171.6 μM kanamycin sulfate, and cultured under the culture conditions described above. The explants are subcultured every three weeks onto fresh medium. Emerging shoots are dissected from the underlying callus and transferred to glass jars with selective medium without zeatin to form roots. The formation of roots in a kanamycin sulfate-containing medium is a positive indication of a successful transformation.

Transformation of soybean plants may be conducted using the methods found in, for example, Townsend et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,563,055, described in brief here. In this method soybean seed is surface sterilized by exposure to chlorine gas evolved in a glass bell jar. Seeds are germinated by plating on 1/10 strength agar solidified medium without plant growth regulators and culturing at 28° C. with a 16 hour day length. After three or four days, seed may be prepared for cocultivation. The seedcoat is removed and the elongating radicle removed 3-4 mm below the cotyledons.

Overnight cultures of Agrobacterium tumefaciens harboring the nucleic acid construct comprising a polynucleotide of the invention are grown to log phase, pooled, and concentrated by centrifugation. Inoculations are conducted in batches such that each plate of seed was treated with a newly resuspended pellet of Agrobacterium. The pellets are resuspended in 20 ml inoculation medium. The inoculum is poured into a Petri dish containing prepared seed and the cotyledonary nodes are macerated with a surgical blade. After 30 minutes the explants are transferred to plates of the same medium that has been solidified. Explants are embedded with the adaxial side up and level with the surface of the medium and cultured at 22° C. for three days under white fluorescent light. These plants may then be regenerated according to methods well established in the art, such as by moving the explants after three days to a liquid counter-selection medium (see Townsend et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,563,055).

The explants may then be picked, embedded and cultured in solidified selection medium. After one month on selective media transformed tissue becomes visible as green sectors of regenerating tissue against a background of bleached, less healthy tissue. Explants with green sectors are transferred to an elongation medium. Culture is continued on this medium with transfers to fresh plates every two weeks. When shoots are 0.5 cm in length they may be excised at the base and placed in a rooting medium.

Example X Transformation of Monocots to Produce Increased Yield or Abiotic Stress Tolerance

Cereal plants such as, but not limited to, corn, wheat, rice, sorghum, or barley, or grasses such as switchgrass or Miscanthus, may be transformed with the present polynucleotide sequences, including monocot or eudicot-derived sequences such as those presented in the present Tables, cloned into a nucleic acid construct, and expressed constitutively under, for example, the rice actin, tubulin or rab17 promoters, or with tissue-specific or inducible promoters. The expression constructs may be one found in the Sequence Listing, or any other suitable construct may be similarly used. For example, pMEN020 may be modified to replace the NptII coding region with the BAR gene of Streptomyces hygroscopicus that confers resistance to phosphinothricin. The KpnI and BglII sites of the Bar gene are removed by site-directed mutagenesis with silent codon changes.

The nucleic acid construct may be introduced into a variety of cereal plants by means well known in the art including direct DNA transfer or Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. The latter approach may be accomplished by a variety of means, including, for example, that of Hiei, U.S. Pat. No. 5,591,616, in which monocotyledon callus is transformed by contacting dedifferentiating tissue with the Agrobacterium containing the nucleic acid construct.

The sample tissues are immersed in a suspension of 3×10⁻⁹ cells of Agrobacterium containing the nucleic acid construct for 3-10 minutes. The callus material is cultured on solid medium at 25° C. in the dark for several days. The calli grown on this medium are transferred to Regeneration medium. Transfers are continued every 2-3 weeks (2 or 3 times) until shoots develop. Shoots are then transferred to Shoot-Elongation medium every 2-3 weeks. Healthy looking shoots are transferred to rooting medium and after roots have developed, the plants are placed into moist potting soil.

The transformed plants are then analyzed for the presence of the NPTII gene/kanamycin resistance by ELISA, using the ELISA NPTII kit from 5Prime-3Prime Inc. (Boulder, Colo.).

It is also routine to use other methods to produce transgenic plants of most cereal crops (Vasil, 1994) such as corn, wheat, rice, sorghum (Cassas et al., 1993), and barley (Wan and Lemeaux, 1994). DNA transfer methods such as the microprojectile method can be used for corn (Fromm et al., 1990; Gordon-Kamm et al., 1990; Ishida, 1990, wheat, Vasil et al., 1992; Vasil et al., 1993; Weeks et al., 1993), and rice (Christou, 1991; Hiei et al., 1994; Aldemita and Hodges, 1996; and Hiei et al., 1997). For most cereal plants, embryogenic cells derived from immature scutellum tissues are the preferred cellular targets for transformation (Hiei et al., 1997; Vasil, 1994). For transforming corn embryogenic cells derived from immature scutellar tissue using microprojectile bombardment, the A188XB73 genotype is the preferred genotype (Fromm et al., 1990; Gordon-Kamm et al., 1990). After microprojectile bombardment the tissues are selected on phosphinothricin to identify the transgenic embryogenic cells (Gordon-Kamm et al., 1990). Transgenic plants are regenerated by standard corn regeneration techniques (Fromm et al., 1990; Gordon-Kamm et al., 1990).

Example XI Increased Yield or Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Non-Arabidopsis Species

It is expected that structurally similar orthologs of the G1760 clade of polypeptide sequences, including those found in the Sequence Listing, can confer increased yield or increased tolerance to a number of abiotic stresses, including water deprivation, osmotic stress, cold, and/or low nitrogen conditions, relative to control plants. As sequences of the invention have been shown to reduce stress symptoms and/or improve abiotic stress tolerance in several diverse plant species, it is also expected that these sequences will increase yield of crop or other commercially important plant species.

Northern blot analysis, RT-PCR or microarray analysis of the regenerated, transformed plants may be used to show expression of a polypeptide or the invention and related genes that are capable of inducing abiotic stress tolerance, and/or larger size.

After a eudicot plant, monocot plant or plant cell has been transformed (and the latter regenerated into a plant) with a G1760 clade member sequence, such as SEQ ID NOs: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, or 31, or a nucleotide sequence encoding SEQ ID NOs: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30 or 32, or a nucleotide sequence encoding a polypeptide comprising a MADS domain of SEQ ID NOs: 33-48, or a sequence that is phylogenetically-related and closely-related to one of these sequences, may be shown to confer increased tolerance to abiotic stress, or produce greater yield relative to a control plant under the stress conditions, or produce greater yield that the control plant under non-stressed conditions. The transformed monocot plant may also be crossed with itself or a plant from the same line, a non-transformed or wild-type monocot plant, or another transformed monocot plant from a different transgenic line of plants.

The function of specific polypeptides of the invention, including closely-related orthologs, have been analyzed and may be further characterized and incorporated into crop plants. The ectopic overexpression of these sequences may be regulated using constitutive, inducible, or tissue specific regulatory elements. Genes that have been examined and have been shown to modify plant traits (including increasing abiotic stress tolerance) encode polypeptides found in the Sequence Listing. In addition to these sequences, it is expected that newly discovered polynucleotide and polypeptide sequences closely related to polynucleotide and polypeptide sequences found in the Sequence Listing can also confer alteration of traits in a similar manner to the sequences found in the Sequence Listing, when transformed into any of a considerable variety of plants of different species, and including dicots and monocots. The polynucleotide and polypeptide sequences derived from monocots (e.g., the rice sequences) may be used to transform both monocot and eudicot plants, and those derived from dicots (e.g., the Arabidopsis and soy genes) may be used to transform either group, although it is expected that some of these sequences will function best if the gene is transformed into a plant from the same group as that from which the sequence is derived.

As an example of a first step to determine water deprivation-related tolerance, seeds of these transgenic plants may be subjected to germination assays to measure sucrose sensing, severe desiccation or drought. Examples of methods for sucrose sensing, severe desiccation or drought assays are described above. Plants overexpressing sequences of the invention may be found to be more tolerant to high sucrose by having better germination, longer radicles, and more cotyledon expansion.

Sequences of the invention, that is, members of the G1760 clade, may also be used to generate transgenic plants that are more tolerant to low nitrogen conditions or cold than control plants. As an example of a first step to determine increased cold or low-nitrogen tolerance, seeds of these transgenic plants may be subjected to germination assays to measure low nitrogen tolerance, altered C/N sensing, or cold tolerance. Examples of these methods are described above. Plants overexpressing sequences of the invention may be found to be more tolerant to cold or low nitrogen by having better germination, or superior growth characteristics, as compared to control plants, under these conditions.

Plants that are more tolerant than controls to water deprivation assays, low nitrogen conditions or cold are greener, more vigorous will have better survival rates than controls, or will recover better from these treatments than control plants.

It is expected that the same methods may be applied to identify other useful and valuable sequences of the present polypeptide clades, and the sequences may be derived from a diverse range of species.

REFERENCES CITED

-   Aldemita and Hodges (1996) Planta 199: 612-617 -   Alia et al. (1998) Plant J. 16: 155-161 -   Altschul (1990) J. Mol. Biol. 215: 403-410 -   Altschul (1993) J. Mol. Evol. 36: 290-300 -   Alvarez-Buylla et al. (2000) Plant J. 24:457-466 -   Anderson and Young (1985) “Quantitative Filter Hybridisation”, In:     Hames and Higgins, ed., Nucleic Acid Hybridisation, A Practical     Approach. Oxford, IRL Press, 73-111 -   Ausubel et al. (1997) Short Protocols in Molecular Biology, John     Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y., unit 7.7 -   Bairoch et al. (1997) Nucleic Acids Res. 25: 217-221 -   Bates et al. (1973) Plant Soil 39: 205-207 -   Battaglia et al. (2006) Mech. Dev. 123: 267-276 -   Bechtold and Pelletier (1998) Methods Mol. Biol. 82: 259-266 -   Berger and Kimmel (1987), “Guide to Molecular Cloning Techniques”,     in Methods in Enzymology, vol. 152, Academic Press, Inc., San Diego,     Calif. -   Bevan (1984) Nucleic Acids Res. 12: 8711-8721 -   Bhattacharjee et al. (2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:     13790-13795 -   Borevitz et al. (2000) Plant Cell 12: 2383-2393 -   Boss and Thomas (2002) Nature, 416: 847-850 -   Bruce et al. (2000) Plant Cell 12: 65-79 -   Cassas et al. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90: 11212-11216 -   Chase et al. (1993) Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 80: 528-580 -   Cheikh et al. (2003) U.S. Patent Application No. 20030101479 -   Christou et al. (1987) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84: 3962-3966 -   Christou (1991) Bio/Technol. 9:957-962 -   Christou et al. U.S. Pat. No. 5,015,580, issued May 14, 1991 -   Christou et al. (1992) Plant. J. 2: 275-281 -   Coruzzi et al. (2001) Plant Physiol. 125: 61-64 -   Coupland (1995) Nature 377: 482-483 -   Daly et al. (2001) Plant Physiol. 127: 1328-1333 -   Davies et al. (1996) (1998) Methods Mol. Biol. 82: 259-266 -   De Blaere et al. (1987) Meth. Enzymol. 143:277) -   Deshayes et al. (1985) EMBO J., 4: 2731-2737 -   D'Halluin et al. (1992) Plant Cell 4: 1495-1505 -   Donn et al. (1990) in Abstracts of VIIth International Congress on     Plant Cell and Tissue Culture IAPTC, A2-38: 53 -   Doolittle, ed. (1996) Methods in Enzymology, vol. 266: “Computer     Methods for Macromolecular Sequence Analysis” Academic Press, Inc.,     San Diego, Calif., USA -   Draper et al. (1982) Plant Cell Physiol. 23: 451-458 -   Eddy (1996) Curr. Opin. Str. Biol. 6: 361-365 -   Eisen (1998) Genome Res. 8: 163-167 -   Feng and Doolittle (1987) J. Mol. Evol. 25: 351-360 -   Fernandez et al. (2000) Plant Cell 12: 183-198 -   Filleur et al. (2005) Biochem. Soc. Trans. 33: 283-286 -   Fowler and Thomashow (2002) Plant Cell 14: 1675-1690 -   Fromm et al. (1990) Bio/Technol. 8: 833-839 -   Fu et al. (2001) Plant Cell 13: 1791-1802 -   Gan et al. (2005) Planta 222: 730-742 -   Glick and Thompson, eds. (1993) Methods in Plant Molecular Biology     and Biotechnology. CRC Press., Boca Raton, Fla. -   Gelvin et al. (1990) Plant Molecular Biology Manual, Kluwer Academic     Publishers -   Glantz (2001) Relative risk and risk score, in Primer of     Biostatistics. 5^(th) ed., McGraw Hill/Appleton and Lange,     publisher. -   Gilmour et al. (1998) Plant J. 16: 433-442 -   Gruber et al., in Glick and Thompson (1993) Methods in Plant     Molecular Biology and Biotechnology. eds., CRC Press, Inc., Boca     Raton -   Goodrich et al. (1993) Cell 75: 519-530 -   Gordon-Kamm et al. (1990) Plant Cell 2: 603-618 -   Haake et al. (2002) Plant Physiol. 130: 639-648 -   Hain et al. (1985) Mol. Gen. Genet. 199: 161-168 -   Haymes et al. (1985) Nucleic Acid Hybridization: A Practical     Approach, IRL Press, Washington, D. C. -   He et al. (2000) Transgenic Res. 9: 223-227 -   Hein (1990) Methods Enzymol. 183: 626-645 -   Henikoff and Henikoff (1989) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:10915 -   Henikoff and Henikoff (1991) Nucleic Acids Res. 19: 6565-6572 -   Hepworth et al. (2002). EMBO J. 21: 4327-4337 -   Herrera-Estrella et al. (1983) Nature 303: 209 -   Hiei et al. (1994) Plant J. 6:271-282 -   Hiei, U.S. Pat. No. 5,591,616, issued 7 Jan. 1997 -   Hiei et al. (1997) Plant Mol. Biol. 35:205-218 -   Higgins and Sharp (1988) Gene 73: 237-244 -   Higgins et al. (1996) Methods Enzymol. 266: 383-402 -   Honma and Goto (2001) Nature 409: 525-529 -   Hosmer and Lemeshow (1999) Applied Survival Analysis: regression     Modeling of Time to Event Data. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publisher. -   Huang et al. (1996) Plant Cell 8: 81-94 -   Immink et al. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99: 2416-2421 -   Ishida (1990) Nature Biotechnol. 14:745-750 -   Jaglo et al. (2001) Plant Physiol. 127: 910-917 -   Jang et al. (1997) Plant Cell 9: 5-19 -   Kashima et al. (1985) Nature 313: 402-404 -   Kim et al. (2001) Plant J. 25: 247-259 -   Kimmel (1987) Methods Enzymol. 152: 507-511 -   Klee (1985) Bio/Technology 3: 637-642 -   Klein et al. (1987) Nature 327: 70-73 -   Klein et al. (1987); U.S. Pat. No. 4,945,050 -   Koornneef et al. (1986) In Tomato Biotechnology: Alan R. Liss, Inc.,     169-178 -   Ku et al. (2000) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97: 9121-9126 -   Kyozuka and Shimamoto (2002) Plant Cell Physiol. 43: 130-135 -   Leon-Kloosterziel et al. (1996) Plant Physiol. 110: 233-240 -   Lim et al. (2000) Plant Mol. Biol. 44: 513-527 -   Lin et al. (1991) Nature 353: 569-571 -   Liu and Zhu (1997) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94: 14960-14964 -   Mandel (1992a) Nature 360: 273-277 -   Mandel et al. (1992b) Cell 71-133-143 -   Meyers (1995) Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Wiley VCH, New     York, N.Y., p 856-853 -   Miki et al. (1993) in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology and     Biotechnology, p. 67-88, Glick and Thompson, eds., CRC Press, Inc.,     Boca Raton -   Mount (2001), in Bioinformatics: Sequence and Genome Analysis, Cold     Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y., p. 543 -   Müller et al. (2001) Plant J. 28: 169-179 -   Nandi et al. (2000) Curr. Biol. 10: 215-218 -   Peng et al. (1997) Genes Development 11:3194-3205) -   Peng et al. (1999) Nature 400: 256-261 -   Porra et al. (1989) Biochim. Biophys. Acta: 975, 384-394 -   Pourtau et al., (2004) Planta 219: 765-772 -   Ratcliffe et al. (2001) Plant Physiol. 126: 122-132 -   Ratcliffe, et al. (2003) Plant Cell 15: 1159-1169 -   Reeves and Nissen (1995) Prog. Cell Cycle Res. 1: 339-349 -   Remans et al. (2006) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103: 19206-19211 -   Riechmann et al. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 4793-4798 -   Riechmann and Meyerowitz (1997) Biol Chem 378: 1079-1101 -   Riechmann et al. (2000a) Science 290, 2105-2110 -   Riechmann, J. L., and Ratcliffe, O. J. (2000b) Curr. Opin. Plant     Biol. 3, 423-434 -   Rieger et al. (1976) Glossary of Genetics and Cytogenetics:     Classical and Molecular, 4th ed., Springer Verlag, Berlin -   Robson et al. (2001) Plant J. 28: 619-631 -   Sadowski et al. (1988) Nature 335: 563-564 -   Saleki et al. (1993) Plant Physiol. 101: 839-845 -   Sambrook et al. (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, 2nd     Ed., Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N. Y. -   Sanford et al. (1987) Part. Sci. Technol. 5:27-37 -   Sanford (1993) Methods Enzymol. 217:483-509 -   Shpaer (1997) Methods Mol. Biol. 70: 173-187 -   Smeekens (1998) Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 1: 230-234 -   Smith et al. (1992) Protein Engineering 5: 35-51 -   Sonnhammer et al. (1997) Proteins 28: 405-420 -   Soltis et al. (1997) Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 84: 1-49 -   Spencer et al. (1994) Plant Mol. Biol. 24: 51-61 -   Stitt (1999) Curr. Opin. Plant. Biol 2: 178-186 -   Suzuki et al. (2001) Plant J. 28: 409-418 -   Tang and Perry (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278: 28154-28159 -   Thompson et al. (1994) Nucleic Acids Res. 22: 4673-4680 -   Tomes et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,322,783, issued Jun. 21, 1994 -   Townsend and Thomas, U.S. Pat. No. 5,563,055, issued Oct. 8, 1996 -   Tudge (2000) in The Variety of Life, Oxford University Press, New     York, N.Y. pp. 547-606 -   Vasil et al. (1992) Bio/Technol. 10:667-674 -   Vasil et al. (1993) Bio/Technol. 11:1553-1558 -   Vasil (1994) Plant Mol. Biol. 25: 925-937 -   Vos, et al. U.S. Pat. No. 6,613,962, issued Sep. 2, 2003 -   Wahl and Berger (1987) Methods Enzymol. 152: 399-407 -   Wan and Lemeaux (1994) Plant Physiol. 104: 37-48 -   Weeks et al. (1993) Plant Physiol. 102:1077-1084 -   Weigel and Nilsson (1995) Nature 377: 482-500 -   Weissbach and Weissbach (1989) Methods for Plant Molecular Biology,     Academic Press -   Wu et al. (1996) Plant Cell 8: 617-627 -   Xin and Browse (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95: 7799-7804 -   Xu et al. (2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 15089-15094 -   Yang et al. (2003) Plant J. 33: 47-59 -   Zhang et al. (1991) Bio/Technology 9: 996-997 -   Zhang and Forde (2000) J. Exp. Bot. 51: 51-59 -   Zhu et al. (1998) Plant Cell 10: 1181-1191

All publications and patent applications mentioned in this specification are herein incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent application was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference.

The present invention is not limited by the specific embodiments described herein. The invention now being fully described, it will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that many changes and modifications can be made thereto without departing from the spirit or scope of the appended claims. Modifications that become apparent from the foregoing description and accompanying figures fall within the scope of the claims. 

1. A transgenic plant transformed with an expression vector that comprises a nucleic acid sequence encoding a polypeptide that has at least 90% amino acid sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 2; and wherein when the polypeptide is expressed in the transgenic plant, the transgenic plant has greater tolerance to a hyperosmotic stress, greater cold tolerance, greater tolerance to low nitrogen conditions, or early flowering relative to a control plant not comprising said expression vector.
 2. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein expression of the polypeptide is regulated by a constitutive, inducible, or tissue-specific promoter.
 3. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein the hyperosmotic stress is selected from the group consisting of drought and 9.4% sucrose.
 4. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein the transformed plant is a dicot.
 5. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein the transformed plant is a legume.
 6. A transgenic plant transformed with an expression vector that comprises a nucleic acid sequence encoding the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO:
 2. 7. A seed of the transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein said seed comprises the expression vector.
 8. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein said polypeptide has at least 95% amino acid sequence identity to SEQ ID NO:
 2. 9. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein said polypeptide has at least 92% amino acid sequence identity to SEQ ID NO:
 2. 10. A recombinant plant cell obtained from the transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein the recombinant plant cell comprises the expression vector.
 11. The transgenic plant of claim 1, wherein the transgenic plant is more tolerant to cold temperature of 8° C. than a control plant not comprising said expression vector. 